Achieving scholarly publication in social science journals is now near-normatively marred by review periods that can last years. This arises primarily from an influx of submissions driven by ‘publish-or-perish’ culture in UK academia, particularly among academic early-career researchers (AcECRs) most subjected to this demand. This article examines the documented issues surrounding publication and their impacts on AcECRs, professional services ECRs, and others within the scholarship-producing community whose experiences are often sidelined. All ECRs are invariably required to publish to maintain contracts, demonstrate expertise, secure grants, and remain in employment, leaving ECRs most harmed by these systemic problems. Collating diverse observations, the author argues that the journal publication model is broken. In response, this article advocates prioritising open-access preprints and withdrawing articles where no review action occurs within reasonable timelines. Pathways for equity are discussed, including the relevance of the Contributor Role Taxonomy, while encouraging further ECR-led dialogue.
Nicholas Norman Adams (Thu,) studied this question.