benefits of editing special issue in the journal

[kerprof]

Please advise what are the benefits of editing special issue in the journal...

[Parasaurolophus]

Not much. It's a feather in your cap, and goes to show that you've got some kind of reputation in your subfield, but it doesn't count for much.

The real advantage is that the result is usually a really good and interesting collection of articles on a single topic, and the issue becomes a go-to resource for people working on that topic. But that's not an advantage that redounds to the editor.

It's a lot of (thankless) work.

[research_prof]

I believe it helps you boost your editorial experience. In the same way that you did not start learning how to drive with a bus, but you rather started with a regular car, I suppose you cannot out of the blue become an editor for the best journal in your field. Special issues help you show that you possess editorial experience when you eventually want to become a regular editor for good journals in your field.

[polly_mer]

If you are known enough to be asked to edit a special issue in a topic near and dear to your heart that you know is not adequately covered elsewhere, then taking on the task is a service and can have some good parts as Parasauralophus wrote.

But, yeah, in general editing a special issue is a lot of thankless work that counts for almost nothing in the greater scheme of things for people who are early career.

[spork]

I will take a slightly different tack: if you are on the tenure-track at a small university where this type of work counts as scholarship, it might be worthwhile, especially if 1) it's for an academic topic that you are already familiar with, 2) there is already a group of contributors lined up for the special issue, and 3) they have a track record of publishing on this topic.

[fourhats]

I will take a slightly different tack: if you are on the tenure-track at a small university where this type of work counts as scholarship, it might be worthwhile, especially if 1) it's for an academic topic that you are already familiar with, 2) there is already a group of contributors lined up for the special issue, and 3) they have a track record of publishing on this topic.

I agree with Spork. In the humanities this would be considered a good thing, and show that you are being viewed as someone becoming recognized in your field as a scholar.

[fizzycist]

I did this once very early in my career. Lots of work. Some insight into the editorial process (mostly understanding why the damn associate editor doesn't get you your reviews quickly).

I would not do it again, but can't say I regret having done it once.

[kerprof]

Not much. It's a feather in your cap, and goes to show that you've got some kind of reputation in your subfield, but it doesn't count for much.

The real advantage is that the result is usually a really good and interesting collection of articles on a single topic, and the issue becomes a go-to resource for people working on that topic. But that's not an advantage that redounds to the editor.

It's a lot of (thankless) work.

I hope if I can partner with 3 or 4 other colleagues for editing the special issue, can the burden be lightened... that way the collaboration relationships can also be strengthened....

[nonsensical]

It helps people learn who you are, which can be a good thing. But if you are in charge of rejecting some of the submissions, people could potentially get mad at you and take that out when they are reviewing your work or writing tenure letters for you.

[Ruralguy]

I agree wiith Spork. At most SLACS this would be a big enough deal to seriously win tenure and maybe even a research award. I think you already said, OP, that you were at an R1, and though it wouldn't really count for a lot at most of them, at least not in the sciences, it wouldn't be a negative so long as you were published elsewhere already and getting grants, etc..