Notice I didn’t say “if” you are rejected? It’s just part of
academic life, especially at the early
career stage. Yes, there are the few academics out there who have never
had anything rejected, but expecting to be one of these academics is a pipe
dream. I know that’s harsh, but the “publish or perish” environment means we
get an awful lot of submissions despite our number of pages not increasing.
So, what should you do when you are rejected? In my
experience, the following should prove useful. Have you found anything
particularly useful in dealing with rejection? Let me know. For further reading, Pat Thomson (@ThomsonPat) has some great blog articles available here: https://patthomson.wordpress.com/category/rejection/.
1.) First and foremost – CALM DOWN.
Take a deep breath. It’s very easy to get upset when you
receive that email. Let yourself be upset for a little bit, it’s OK. Better to
get it out of your system.
 |
| Other ECRs are an important support group |
2.) Accept that the comments and the decision are not
personal.
This is not a personal commentary on you or your academic
abilities.
3.) Read the comments. Re-read them. Read them again. And
when you’re finished, go away for a bit and then read them again later.
| This should be you |
Why? Because it’s easy to misconstrue the comments and
suggestions. Reviewers, in general, are very constructive. Editors also want to
help. Not all comments will be constructive, but it’s quite rare to get nothing
helpful back, even on the rare occasion that it's done poorly and harshly.
4.) Make sure you understand the comments
WHAT are the reviewers and/or editors trying to tell you
about your paper? Have you been rejected because your word count is over, or
have you been rejected because you haven’t used a coherent structure?
WHY have they told you this? Usually a reviewer will give
justification for modifications.
HOW do they suggest you rectify any issues with your paper?
5.) Remember that reviewer evaluations are honest
evaluations.
They tend to be honest. Use them constructively. A reviewer
isn’t getting paid to write all those comments about how you can improve your
paper. The editor probably isn’t getting paid much (if anything), so if they
invest time in your paper to make comments, do them the courtesy of respecting
that it’s an honest evaluation. The anonymity of the double-blind system really
helps with this.
 |
| That moment when you realise that you agree with the reviewers |
6.) Consider whether it’s in your best interest to rewrite
your paper.
You don’t have to take all the suggestions on board. You are
free to disagree with them. Once a decision is made on your paper, it is “released”
(see my post on multiple submissions), and you are free to submit to another
journal. It might fit better somewhere else. But make sure you’ve addressed any
fundamental issues that have been identified, or those issues will affect
future submissions.
7.) Last, but certainly not least, LEARN from the process.
Remember that just about all academics will be rejected at
some point. It is not unusual, and journals prefer to have a high rejection
rate. Learn from the process and from the reviewers’ and editors’ comments in
order to better your chances in the future.
Questions? Comments? Thoughts? Comment below, or keep the
emails and tweets coming.
-theAdmin
