How to keep picking yourself up

[Rebounder]

I'm trying to keep this neutral - my natural inclination is to be very resilient and to depersonalise, but today I'm struggling.

I've just had a surprising rejection from a not particularly competitive journal, one I'd agreed to submit to because it was a good fit for a number of reasons. I'd aimed to be first with a particular result, and thought that getting an important result out quickly was worth the low impact factor.

I’m now five months’ behind where I was at the submission point, so won’t be the first with this result. More broadly, I have no big papers yet and am some years post-PhD. I have lots of professional virtues but not known for a clear expertise. My guess is I’m seen as a technician and dabbler.

I think cross-disciplinary work is important - integrating different insights is perhaps the thing that motivates me most - but the reviews often have a theme of ‘this is not what we do’. My reviews are often mixed with the positive review very flattering, but the editors have to date come down consistently on the side of the negative review.

I have a good starter post at a good institution, but travel costs are very difficult and commuting has put pressure on my family. I’m unlikely to get promoted even next year without a run of papers, and living costs are just escalating.

Things look bleak. There will be pressure to leave the field for something close to home. In some ways it would be a relief, but I’ve never given up on anything before.

The usual advice to just turn the paper around quickly & send it somewhere else is harder to take when the review comes back just before an enforced break at the most expensive time of year. Also, I can’t easily see where else the paper could go - the right outlets are much more competitive, and I failed at a low hurdle. I guess I could just post it as a working paper and dump it, and focus on my other papers.

Separately, I'm overwhelmed with having not prepared for Christmas (waiting for the early December pay day to be able to afford it).

[FraterculaArctica]

Happy to chat, also some years post PhD with a poor publication record, and too cross-disciplinary! Rejection from a not very competitive journal doesn't sound good though. What field are you in? (ish) If it's anywhere near mine I may have some more concrete ideas...

[NotDavidTennant]

Submitting papers is a bit of a crapshoot. As you've discovered, one bad review is usually enough to elicit a rejection even if the other review is glowing. It depends so much on which editor and reviewers that you get that you can't assume that because you've been rejected from one particular journal you will definitely get rejected from other more prestigious journals.

Address those reviewers comments that you think are sensible, get a trusted colleague to have a look over the manuscript to see if they can think of any better ways to 'spin' the work to make it more publishable, then then turn it round to the next journal.

It can be a bit of a shitty business but you do become more thick-skinned to it after a while.

[Rebounder]

Thank you both. FraterculaArctica - your offer is so very kind. I'm nervous that I may know you in real life and need to be anonymous on here!

I should stop catastrophising and just rework it, when I can find a spare couple of days. I'm just very tired.

[Thetreesareallgone]

It's the wrong time of year to be leaping up and reworking stuff, it is for me anyway, tired after the term. I've just had a paper rejected from a poorer impact journal paper (but where I though it fitted perfectly) to being accepted in a higher impact journal (where it works for me in other ways). So- it's always a bit of a lottery, in my case, the first journal could have given major revisions but I think they are a bit overwhelmed by submissions, so chose to pass it on.

It doesn't mean it won't go elsewhere, you mustn't assume that, just make it your first thing of the New Year to address any major issues and pass it right back out there.

The speed of the whole journal thing is grinding to a halt, I'm finding reviews are taking so long, then revisions months to approve, even when very minor, and it's all just painfully slow, which I think tends to make you more anxious.

Don't get stressed right now, put it in pending til you have a bit more energy. Also, I only started Christmas shopping today, so you are not the only one!

[MedSchoolRat]

Chin Up, Rebounder, you can do this.
Can you tell us who gave you the boot, or something about them? That could suggest who to send the item to, next. Or what the primary reasons were for rejection?

Believe me, there's a journal out there for everything. Nothing is so bad or dull or unoriginal that it can't be published anywhere.

Do you have a budget for OpenAccess fees, is OA budget or requirements at all part of the picture?

[Rebounder]

Oh, I cheered up in the end...!

I do need a flow of 'good news' to stay motivated, and that makes this profession tough because grant & publication results come through so sporadically. It really helped when I got encouraging comments on something else which is nearly ready to go, which gave me a lift.

The reviewer thought it too long and complex in their view when they preferred it to be restricted to one specific aspect of the subject. They were a sub-disciplinary specialist & thought it would be badly-received in their corner of the field. The people who had read the paper before submission had however liked that feature of the paper, so I was perhaps just unlucky.

It's not anything a redraft couldn't sort out, so I'll put it somewhere else - though my Pollyanna attitude only stretches so far. I can hardly spare the additional time spent heavily revising it. Some of our mantras e.g. 'revisions make papers better' doesn't necessarily mean that making it 5% better is the best use of 5 days of my time.

What I learned: stop trying to write for generalists & pick a tribe & dig in. Use field-specific jargon terminology, be less eclectic in referencing. Be much more concise and respectful of readers' time. (Instinctively I think that machine-gun delivery is boring to read, but it helps position papers more clearly.) I do think it's a matter of opinion whether the existing version is rich and nuanced versus rambling & unfocused, but of course I don't get to decide.

Onward!

[QueenRefusenik]

If it helps, a colleague of mine got a paper in Nature last year, complete with big media hoopla. When I congratulated him he admitted it was the 4th place he'd submitted. He was so fed up with the first three rejections he thought 'fuck it' and stuck it in to Nature without even editing while he thought of somewhere else to submit it... Honestly, reviewers are a crap shoot. Read, process anything substantive and ignore the rest (I know, easier said than done, but still...)

[Thetreesareallgone]

Queen- that's a great story.

On a far lesser level, I got accepted from a journal recently where the impact factor was much better than the original rejected journal. You do have to keep going sometimes.

I'm finding it harder to get accepted for conference papers recently- I've had a couple of papers downgraded to 'posters' last year (actually three in a row). I'm not quite at the 'keynote' stage yet so this is really frustrating. I have no idea why either, as the topic I'm writing about is extremely timely (although controversial); either my abstracts are dull and this isn't transmitting or there's something else going on.

[Rebounder]

I'm inspired! Thank you! Some time off is helping a lot, too...

[CardsforKittens]

Nothing is so bad or dull or unoriginal that it can't be published anywhere.

I love this! I love it so much!

[Rebounder]

I'm reviving a zombie thread, because I recently turned this paper around, and am about to submit it somewhere good. Even if it gets knocked back, it will get better and will find its place. Colleagues have been very positive about it.

On rereading the paper, I could immediately see what was wrong: I was trying to fit too much in; the paper kept adding charming ideas but not seeing them through; they weren't tied to the actual analysis closely enough; I lacked authority in a tight sub-discipline and you need to observe norms to be taken seriously. More than that, I was writing it tired, and couldn't see the wood for the trees.

Other papers have been accepted in the meantime with really strong reviews. So things are beginning to look up.

But re-reading my original post, what's clear is that I was accurate about my weaknesses (I've had grant feedback recently which echoed a lot of this) without being very inclined to address them :-) I liked my flaws, I didn't see them as flaws but as quirks or strengths. I'm now in much more self-preserving mode.

I also immediately saw that the advice I got was incredibly high-quality and kind.

So - thanks all. People rarely come back with good news, so I thought I would :-)

[Nearlyalmost50]

Rebounder that's great- I read this but it didn't ring any bells til I saw I'd answered it under an old username! Glad you are keeping on keeping on.

[impostersyndrome]

That’s encouraging news, both for you and for any academic reading this.

[inexcessive]

It's really great to read this - congratulations.

I have really struggled with some awful reviews and knockbacks over the years and continue to do so. I am finally beginning to realise though that part of my problem is that I have not really been inhabiting a 'growth mindset.' I have tended to read poor reviews as entirely damning and personal rather than trying to approach them with a level head. Once I've done the latter, I have seen (similar to you I think) that often I am getting very good advice that I have been reluctant to take on board. Anyway, thanks for coming back with a positive story.

As an aside, I absolutely love this space to ask questions I can't ask elsewhere as someone who has been an academic for some time now and feels as though I should know the answers. Thanks to all the posters who provide such supportive and good advice.

[SarahAndQuack]

Oh, this is such a lovely thread to read, with the update. It's really cheered me up as I've just been worrying about my own publication record!