Is a book chapter not worth much?

[mumsyphdtired]

Im first year phd, and a conference I attended (and wrote a full length paper for) is organising a book from it and was invited to submit a chapter.

My supervisors say not to bother, as papers are worth far more, but I feel weird turning down an opportunity, and I understand papers are difficult to publish - I feel what I did was fine, but its not like...ground breaking, my baby, that I only want to publish in a certain place if you know what I mean.

I'm new to all this and don't really understand the REF system or anything so would appreciate advice!

Listen to your supervisors. In my area book chapters are not considered REFable and a department would not put one in. Also if you use empirical material in a book chapter you cannot then use it again in a journal article, though you can repeat material from a journal article in a book chapter. There are many good reasons to write book chapters but they are spectacularly unlikely to go into the REF so at your stage in your career don't do it, and certainly not if you're advised against it.

It really depends on discipline.

In my area (English) they are probably worth less than a journal article in general, but a chapter in an OUP collection edited by a big name v a second tier journal..... the chapter would win.

Plus there can be different reasons for doing a chapter. I have chapters in a couple of state-of-the-field books. My name is in there along with some seriously well known people. That can help with reputation building. I have gone on to organise other projects with them using that as an opening.

However, your supervisors know your field better than I do so prob best to listen to them.

I agree with what's been said, but the other thing that occurs to me is that your supervisors might be suggesting you pass this up because they can see a way for this to turn from a so-so piece of work (which you say isn't groundbreaking) to something that really could be special. In my field, it would be fairly rare to publish something really strong as a first year PhD student, and I know there's a feeling that some early publications are a waste because they muddy the water. I am the last person to advise really, because I didn't publish early enough. But I do know people who published early papers that were fine, but which they slightly regret as those papers might have been published as a section of something much stronger, a bit later on.

I think giving your research away this early into a chapter is probably what they want to avoid. If you have already published it, and want to expand more or do something theoretical, book chapters can be a good place to do this- as someone else has said, there may also be benefits of being in a 'good' collection. I would listen to your supervisors.

Thank you! My supervisors generally seem to think I'm doing too much so I was checking they not discouraging for that reaon