The above title more or less speaks for itself. I am planning to submit a revised version of my PhD thesis for publication as a monograph. However, I've already published 3 articles from the work in Q1 rated journals in my field. My question is this, all other things being equal (viz: quality and marketability), how is this likely to impact upon the publisher's decision?

Your experiential thoughts on this would be highly welcomed. Pat.

Great question! I don't have experience of this I'm afraid... But I do hope to be in your position soon and this is a concern for me too, so thanks for asking.

Another person who is contemplating something similar (my thesis is in literature) so I'd also be grateful for any input from someone with experience of this...

My university will use certain software to check for self-plagiarism.
It depends on your university... ...

@ MeaninginLife. I have seen instances where some publishers (including Taylor & Francis, Routledge) after publishing articles in one volume of a journal then re-published all the articles in that same journal as a book. Essentially, if you have a copy of that journal you din't need to buy the book because they have the same contents. I have also seen instances where academics collate journal articles they have published over the years and publish them as books. I have also seen instances where, after publishing their PhD theses as monographs, academics obtained copyright permissions from the publisher to publish chapters from the monographs as journal articles. In fact, a very senior academic in my field who is currently writing a book recently approached me to know if I could obtain copyright permission from the publisher of one of my articles from the publisher so he could include the paper as a chapter in his forthcoming commissioned book. Are these cases of self-plagiarism? If they are, I know Oxford, Cambridge, Stanford, Harvard academics who have these type of works on their public profiles. In fact, one example that I can site off hand is Joel Feinberg's "The Child's Right to an Open Future". Originally published in 1980, this paper has re-appeared in subsequently published works including as a book chapter in Randall Curren's Philosophy of Education: An Anthology.

....continued...

For publishers, this isn't (I think) a case of the ethics of, but the economics of, publishing. If sections/chapters of a proposed title have already been previously published in journals, is it still worth it (in financial terms) publishing the book or monograph? Or, is it financially harmful (for a publisher) to allow an author to publish, as journal article(s), a chapter or two from a published book/monograph? It is in connection with this line of thought that I'm asking this question. Moreover, a top publisher who in spite of positive reviews (all three anonymous reviewers of my manuscript advised that the work be accepted for publication) declined publishing it, suggesting that I add an international dimension to the work when in my view the reason for declining it has to do with potential sales figures (the subject area, as a result of Michael Gove's educational policies, is in decline).

Hi all,

To my knowledge, there is a period of two years after which you can ask the publisher for copyright permission to re-publish your work somewhere else. So it is doable. I think that I am correct in saying that this two-year period is waived if you publish in translation.

I have never come across anybody who re-published the content of several articles as a monograph based on their PhD though.

I do know a few cases in which theses openly available on-line through Ethos were published pretty much in the same format by major Publishers ( who were aware of this) in the field. So, it might indeed be the case of how "trendy" your topic is.

Of course, it is doable.
However, as I've said, it depends on individual university... The university has their own rules and regulations...
Some professors try to set a higher ethical standard in publication, for example.

Furthermore, because of competition within certain university, one could be labelled as "Cut-and-Paste" by their friends.
That is, some academic keep publishing by recycling substantially previous ideas...
It may generate negative feeling among your colleagues.

Maybe nothing will happen to you... However, the trend may change in future.

@DrCorinne (and others), if I may ask, which of the two (journal articles or monograph) do you think looks best on a prospective academic job seeker's CV?