Pros and cons of joining the editorial board of a journal (humanities)?

[downer]

Is the OP going to answer any questions?

[mleok]

I'd expand on the senior people. Leaders in the field are on the editorial board to reinforce the importance of the journal. An editorial board with a strong representation of the big names is signaling that it is so important that it is worth their while to serve. More important is that they work to keep the standards high. Both the standards for manuscript quality, but also that authors are treated well. Senior people are less motivated by a low workload than by the sense that the time they spend has value in advancing their field.

Sure, if you're a National Academy Member, Fellow of the Royal Society, Nobel Prize Laureate or Fields Medalist, then your service on an editorial board probably imparts prestige to the journal instead. But, for the majority of full professors at most universities, serving on an editorial board of a prestigious journal is an honor, so it's not as if one doesn't derive some measure of professional clout from that service unless one is already truly a world leader in one's field. Having said that, even if one is an internationally recognized leader in your subfield, there are often broad disciplinary journals that service as an editor for would provide additional visibility beyond the people who might be working in your subfield. The truth of the matter is that full professor isn't necessarily the highest rank one can achieve at many universities, as one might still aspire to a Distinguished Professorship or University Professorship, and the university committees tasked with such nominations would probably view editorial service on prestigious journals, prizes, grants, keynote and plenary talks, and the like to be esteem indicators.

[spork]

Is the OP going to answer any questions?

Haha. No.

I recently declined a request from someone pretty high up in my disciplinary association to serve on a committee. My work would not have been compensated. I said no. I'm a full professor. 

[AeroProf]

Thank you, everyone, for the answers! It's finals time here.
@RuralGuy: Good suggestion. I'm hesitant to reach out because they are likely to be as swamped as I am with finals (their unis are on similar schedules). I would take your advice and wait until end of term if I didn't have to make the decision ASAP. I've learned a lot from your advice on the board!
@Hibus: "For OP AeroProf, does this membership provide you influence to advance your field in ways that you see as important?"
In a way: In the past, I have managed to provide at least a few graduate student/first-year assistant professor authors (from departments in institutions with minimal profiles in our field) with sufficiently detailed feedback that they turned all-but-rejections from the journal (I recommended revise-and-resubmit, while the other readers submitted brief rejections) into well-written articles that made solid contributions (for those authors, I also made a case in the letter to the editor to give them a chance; I don't do this for every MSS, of course). In that way, I see careful feedback as a way to advance professional development for scholars who are underserved/not helped by mentors in the same way that ECRs at more high-profile institutions are.
I appreciate your take on the pros and cons.
@Spork: The compensation is $0.
@Wahoo Redux: Thanks!
The comments on the path to full professor are food for thought, too.

[Hibush]

@Hibus: "For OP AeroProf, does this membership provide you influence to advance your field in ways that you see as important?"
In a way: In the past, I have managed to provide at least a few graduate student/first-year assistant professor authors (from departments in institutions with minimal profiles in our field) with sufficiently detailed feedback that they turned all-but-rejections from the journal (I recommended revise-and-resubmit, while the other readers submitted brief rejections) into well-written articles that made solid contributions (for those authors, I also made a case in the letter to the editor to give them a chance; I don't do this for every MSS, of course). In that way, I see careful feedback as a way to advance professional development for scholars who are underserved/not helped by mentors in the same way that ECRs at more high-profile institutions are.

This is a very insightful answer. While the activities superficially appear to be down in the fine details of publishing, it is precisely what is needed to get diversification of the next generation of scholars in the field. That has a huge impact.

[Myword]

I thought that these positions were mainly honorary, a sinicure.

Question: would you send an article that sharply criticizes the work of a member of the editorial board?

[Hibush]

I thought that these positions were mainly honorary, a sinicure.

Question: would you send an article that sharply criticizes the work of a member of the editorial board?

Sure, if I knew for sure that I was universally recognized as a deeper and more rigorous scholar than the editorial board member, with many unassailable accomplishments in the field.

[Parasaurolophus]

Question: would you send an article that sharply criticizes the work of a member of the editorial board?

Sure. For the most part, I have no idea who's on the board of which journals. I only ever check out editorial boards for journals with which I'm unfamiliar.

[larryc]

Would it be possible to speak with any current or former members of this board? I have the feeling that the intensity of the work varies wildly between and among fields.

This is an excellent idea.