The APA and the BPA have just published the results of their joint philosophy journal survey here, and here (respectively). Data includes number of submissions, acceptance rates, time to publication, percent female authors, and a few other things. I have only had a quick look through the data, and I’m sure someone will do a more thorough analysis in the near future, but I do have a couple of concerns.
First, it doesn’t look to me as if there is as strong a correlation between perceived (by me) prestige and acceptance rates as we tend to assume. For example, Nous and Dialectica have comparable acceptance rates, and both have higher acceptance rates than the European Journal of Philosophy. Now these are all well-regarded journals, but it seems to me that Nous is seen to be significantly more prestigious than the other two (but feel free to correct me on this).
My other concern is the selection of journals. The most glaring omission is the Journal of Philosophy, arguably our most prestigious journal. Even more worrying to me is the lack of specialist journals in logic and philosophy of mathematics. For example, none of the publications of the Association of Symbolic Logic were included, nor were Philosophia Mathematica (the top journal for philosophy of mathematics), Studia Logica, or History and Philosophy of Logic.
Note that specialists journals in many other areas, including (but not limited to) ethics, political philosophy, aesthetics, metaphysics, and Ancient, were included, though I imagine many others were not.
I would be interested on other peoples thoughts on this—especially pointers to better analysis of the data or pointers to explanations I may have missed.
A Philosopher's Take 
Posted on March 18, 2015 by Aaron Thomas-Bolduc