Will Allen

A narrow path with a distant arch, surrounded by green plants and leaves

Evening, Oxfordshire

Really important work that speaks across #polisky #polcom

#polisky #polcom #academicsky

Congrats Fran!

The chart shows the cumulative counts of reviews received and submitted over time from 2012-2025.

The chart shows the "net reviewing" count over time: when the line goes above 0, this indicates more reviews submitted than received. When the line goes below 0, this indicates a reviewing "debt" where more reviews were received than submitted. The vertical lines indicate key moments: earlier in the career, I operated in a review deficit, but this has flipped as time has gone on.

The balance of doing vs receiving peer-reviews has also changed. During my PhD, I submitted more work that created reviewing needs (a "deficit"). I also took on fewer reviews early in my teaching post while trying to get work out. But this helps me see if I'm roughly pulling my reviewing weight. 8/n

A crowd of music-lovers bathed in purple and blue light. The Traitors logo is in the background: who do you trust?

Feeling Traitor-ish #proms

Tagging #polcom as the correct one and #migcitsky

I absolutely get that the job market and publishing is broken and hardly ideal in many ways (and that goes for peer-review too: more evidence on that hopefully soon...) But I also think we're doing colleagues a disservice, both professionally and personally, by not being open about the process. 7/n

But it has implications for advising early-career colleagues facing job market choices: bsky.app/profile/will.... If we think a CV needs a paper at R&R stage at a good journal at a minimum to make a difference, we should plan at least 90 days turnaround--or more if it (likely) takes >2 tries. 6/n

Openness about outcomes and timings is important to me because I didn't have anyone in my family or networks in research, never mind in political science (it's wasn't a thing in the rural American Midwest). It hopefully sheds some light on how peer-review works, for those not yet in the know. 5/n

A chart showing the amount of time it takes me to submit reviews: recommendations to reject take a median of 41 days, while recommendations to revise take a median of 36 days. About 55% of the time I recommend rejecting, while about 45% of the time recommending revise and resubmit.

Third, when reviewing, I advise R&R about 45% of the time. This takes me about 5-6 weeks regardless of my recommendation. Looking at ones that took longer, these were due to COVID or a journal giving 3 month deadlines. (Tasks fill up the time you give them--a lesson for editorial teams!) 4/n

A chart showing the number times a paper had to be submitted somewhere before it was accepted. It took a median of two submissions, but most were accepted at the first submission. One paper took six tries.

Second, and just as importantly, papers eventually land. For me, an acceptance came after a median of trying at two journals (though most commonly at the first one). But, about 1-in-6 took four or more tries: I'm a glutton for rejection I guess 🤷

A chart showing median times to different outcomes of my papers: desk rejects take 8.5 days, rejections 43 days, and revise decisions take 89 days. About 75% of my submissions have been rejected at some point in the reviewing process.

First, of my submissions with a first decision, 75% were eventually rejected: about 30% in-house after a median of 8.5 days, and about 45% after external review in a median of 73 days. (One desk reject took 109 days: I wouldn't wish that on anyone). R&Rs took about 3 months. 2/n

I've been tracking my peer review activity over the years (like @alessandronai.bsky.social @turnbulldugarte.com) ad wanted to share some of that for transparency, manage expectations, and reflect on what it suggests for early-career researchers' development, esp. in #polisky #commsky #policom 1/n

You had me at ‘snacking cake’

Happy birthday!

A rectangular loaf with red and purple fruits throughout, and a crumbly topping.

Blackberry and cherry crumble cake #poliskybakes

I vote for the flipping tables club!

Congratulations to you all! So good to see this out!

Parabéns and well done!

A black and white photo of a Jack Russell being kissed on the top of her head as she thinks about her favourite dinner: pollo.

A Jack Russell terrier looks out of a car window: is there chicken out there?

Feliz quinceañera Pepa / Happy 15th #dogdad #jackrussell

Congratulations - a party of one is still a worthwhile celebration!

Am currently reading this on the back of @dingdingpeng.the100.ci’s rec and IT IS SO GOOD, especially for situations where you want something thought-provoking but can’t or don’t want to commit to an extended read

Are you thinking of applying for multi-year research fellowships this summer? Unsure of how you can compellingly write about that ‘next idea’? I shared experiences from my @magdalenoxford.bsky.social and @britishacademy.bsky.social postdocs, including examples from the research statements.

That's a good idea, alongside what Lawrence did which was to use the Wayback Machine to capture historical job posts. (But the job alerts emails might be a good way to fill in any gaps in internet archiving).

ECRs in the lurch: new analysis finds no recruitment surge to make up for Spring’s drastic drop | The Political Studies Association (PSA)

@lawrencemckay.bsky.social did a blog on this during the pandemic, but not sure if that data collection was kept going: www.psa.ac.uk/specialist-g...

Now with pages in New Media & Society: the ever-brilliant @anya-j.bsky.social and I examined how UK refugee-serving orgs use Instagram, and how this can both reinforce and weaken boundaries between refugees and receiving communities. Open-acess: doi.org/10.1177/1461... #polcom #commsky #migcitsky

Congratulations!

This gave strong Babish vibes

Returning from another great #epsa2025, I’ve been thinking about something that happened several times. In group settings, I either misnamed or misrecognized folks who I already knew. Socially awkward for sure!