Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

University staff common room

This board is for university-based professionals. Find discussions about A Levels and universities on our Further education forum.

Flip

Original poster

Desk reject devastation

19 replies

startoftheline · 05/12/2016 16:42

This is a moan, I admit it. I got a desk reject today. Never had that before. I am devastated. It's just the sheer amount of work I put into this paper which seems like such a sunk cost now. I could have spent that time with my kids for all the good it's done me, and wish I had. I think the editor actually worked hard to make it not too utterly demoralising, but the comments were on the other hand quite damning. The paper was clearly rubbish. I am honestly wondering whether to carry on at this point or to look for a different job. I just don't know whether I can continue to carry the shame of being so crap at publishing. Sorry, this is a real self-pitying moan, but I can't even share this with colleagues because I feel so humiliated! Anyone else (ever) feel like this? How do you pick yourself up?

OP posts:

LRDtheFeministDragon · 05/12/2016 16:55

What's a desk reject?

I'm always crushed by rejections, and I don't have a solution. I just feel crushed for a while and then try my best to put in out of my mind. But I feel better when I chat to colleagues as it does make me realise we're all in the same boat.

If it helps, when I was doing my PhD there was a bloke who was a few years older and who used to boast that he'd never had an article rejected. We all thought it was terribly impressive and clearly he was destined from great things. He's still doing 9-month teaching contracts and publishing less and less, and his papers are widely known as pretty shallow scholarship. I can't help thinking if he'd sent a piece to a half-decent journal earlier, he'd have had the experience of a harsh rejection and he might have learned from it, instead of stagnating while writing pieces that haven't really done a lot for his career.

Original poster

startoftheline · 05/12/2016 17:20

LRD thanks for replying but I think I may feel worse as you clearly have never even come close to such a thing! A desk reject is when they don't even bother sending it for review, it's SO VERY BAD!!! I don't publish very much. I'm slow to produce stuff, and I think I might also be guilty of pretty shallow scholarship. That's why I really am thinking that perhaps I am in the wrong job, which is very hard, because I've built my identity around this job and there are many things that I love about it. I just don't think I quite have the intellectual firepower for the big time. Bugger.

OP posts:

AMomentaryLapseOfReason · 05/12/2016 17:27

This is going to vary madly by field I expect, but 'chin up' advice in my department is always that you chose the wrong journal! Is there anywhere else it could go?

Original poster

startoftheline · 05/12/2016 17:34

Hi momentary. I don't think it was the wrong journal, but yes, it could go elsewhere. Re-worked, not as is. I mean this was a top journal that does only accept about 7% of submissions in total. And I guess it's better to be told now rather than wait for ages for a first review, looking on the bright side. And the editor did give some useful pointers I think, which I appreciated. But .... I don't know, I feel that I really haven't understood what it means to make a theoretical contribution. So much of what I read seems to be taking something really quite simple and making it incredibly complex, but whenever I try to do the same, it never works! Which makes me think I am on the shallow side of scholarly!! Self-pity warning once again.

OP posts:

LRDtheFeministDragon · 05/12/2016 17:38

start - oh, no, I should have explained. It's just because I am very junior. I haven't had one of those but I have only submitted a couple of papers.

Dozer · 05/12/2016 17:43

Sorry you're having a bad time.

Not an academic but if they only accept 7% then quite a high proportion might not go out for review? So it might not mean the paper was rubbish at all.

Are your employer Ok with your work overall?

V few people in any occupation make the "big time". Most just have minor highs/lows and try to enjoy what we can!

CocoaX · 05/12/2016 18:06

If it is not sent for review, and the editors have given you good pointers, this is a stepping stone for improving it. Believe me, academics are SO pushed for time that if there is nothing in a paper, then the comments will be minimal.
If the editor sees something in it, they are taking the time to tell you that,so you can re-work it.
As a reviewer, it is frustrating to get a paper which needs work and you don't want that frustration to interfere with a critical and constructive reading of your work.
Do you want to say what field you are in? Happy to comment if I can.

By the way, I had a desk reject and it ended up an excellent REF submission - no paper is right first time. Don't be scared to approach colleagues - see if you can do an informal workshop to discuss direction etc with some you like and respect etc.

Japonicathehorseygirl · 05/12/2016 18:19

If there is anything that you can take from the Editors comments then do so and see it as something gained. It's important to try to move on from this and rework then resubmit somewhere else. I suggest asking a colleague to have a read through before resubmitting it. I know how bad it can feel now but try not to take the feeling of rejection personally. Do try to stay encouraged. I have found that the publishing process gets a bit easier over time as you get more experienced. I am in natural science if that's any help

AddictedtoLove · 05/12/2016 19:23

advice in my department is always that you chose the wrong journal

This is my first thought (and as a journal editor).

I mean this was a top journal that does only accept about 7% of submissions in total

So you're one of the 93% that gets feedback, uses it to improve the paper, and publishes it elsewhere.

DoctorGilbertson · 05/12/2016 19:38

Do you want to hear my best "bounced without review" rejection from a journal editor?

"this is of neither methodological nor substantive interest"

We did a chunk of horribly painful re-write and got it published somewhere else in the end.

Almost as good as the (probably not quoting correctly) "there are only two problems with this, style and content" comment (thanks to a Catherine Fox novel for that one).

DoctorGilbertson · 05/12/2016 19:44

And I am sure that you have seen this CV of failures:

www.princeton.edu/~joha/Johannes_Haushofer_CV_of_Failures.pdf

MedSchoolRat · 05/12/2016 19:51

omg OP, i mean this kindly, you really need to grow a thicker skin.
And thank heavens they gave you a quick decision. It's far worse when they reject you after 3-4 months, and the referees only gave useless comments.

Stories about "How fast did you get rejected" are party pieces at my workplace. One Professor (very capable clever cogs) got Reject in under 15 minutes (time it took him to go get a sandwich).

I wish there was a faster way to do all the formatting for each journal, so we could swap between much more quickly. Colleague swears by Latec, but I see lots of problems with that, too. We sometimes resort to just writing a generic format paper and then reformat properly only if they don't reject.

Dozer · 05/12/2016 20:03

Wow, it all sounds ruthless! Love the CV of failures and especially the end!

MedSchoolRat · 05/12/2016 20:17

I dunno if it is ruthless... maybe only when you do try to produce quality. There's a load of tripe getting published. Someone got me to sub to Retraction Watch on FB. Then there are predatory journals. Or simple scams. Good Referees add to the paper. I have genuine effusive thanks for the 3 Refs who just gave good quality comments one one of my papers (and quick, too!). Even though I will have done about 40 hours of revisions in reply (argh. I hate stats, I hate stats, I hate stats...)

purplepandas · 05/12/2016 20:27

Rejection is hard. I agree about talking to others. I think we often see the successes on Twitter/email/newsletters but rarely the 'failure'. I also like to see the CV of failures. Last week I got two rejections in one day (funding and PhD funding). Crap! I was so demoralised and mentioned to a colleague who had two similar rejections the previous day. I find that being honest about the good and the bad can make it feel more reasonable and less as if it is just you. I also think that imposter syndrome can be dangerous. I often feel that I should not be doing my job and feel out of my depth. Publishing is hard. Can you get someone else to work with you on the paper? I find that working with someone else really helps me (assuming they are the right person!)

Good luck :)

Original poster

startoftheline · 06/12/2016 11:17

Thanks everybody. I needed some tough talk. And it's good to know I am not the only one, I do feel very isolated at times. It's a while since I had any good news along with the crap news, so I think that's why I am feeling especially demoralised. I have co-authors with whom I am working on other papers, which is good, it just takes so bloody long. I am in the social sciences by the way.

I do think that my imposter syndrome is quite crippling, almost to the extent of wondering about counselling. Promotion has been mentioned recently by a couple of people who think I've got a case, I think because I have a strong impact/public engagement record, get on the TV and radio from time to time, that sort of stuff. But I don't feel comfortable with it! I don't think my publication record deserves it. Is that mad? It does sound a bit mad when I write it down.

I am going to post another question about something different in a mo. Really I should just re-write that bloody paper rather than faffing about on Mumsnet.

OP posts:

Lovelyskin · 06/12/2016 16:10

That stings, but I wouldn't give up academia over one rejection! I've had quite a few as I always start with the big journal, then work down. I've had several papers that didn't make the big one then go elsewhere and do fine in the REF. I must have low standards.

Dozer · 06/12/2016 17:57

Yes, do seek help for that. Sounds like you're actually doing alright!

Godstopper · 07/12/2016 08:28

In my discipline, a desk rejection from a top journal is normal. They are deluged with papers, and it could be e.g just a bad fit. The advice when this happens is to simply send it to the next one on the list - if it was awful, you would be told (philosophers are very good at pointing out what is wrong with stuff, and frankly, there are some unpleasant people who enjoy sending nasty comments).

Step away. Then rework and resend.

Flip