Photo by Florian Klauer on Unsplash I’ve just submitted my first solo article to a peer reviewed journal. I’ve told myself that I’m now going to put it out of my mind and think about other things, maybe even start writing another...
By submitting a journal article, you are necessarily opening yourself up to criticism
Photo by Florian Klauer on Unsplash
I’ve just submitted my first solo article to a peer reviewed journal. I’ve told myself that I’m now going to put it out of my mind and think about other things, maybe even start writing another paper to keep the momentum going. In the back of my mind though I’m preparing myself for, if not outright rejection, scathing reviewer comments. Although I’ve yet to experience this directly, two things have come up recently that have made me dread the process.
First, a paper to which I was a tangential contributing author was immediately rejected. I was surprised, and very disappointed for the lead authors as I’d been involved with the research since its inception, and I thought it was a very valid and interesting project and that the journal’s readership would agree. But no dice. Then my PhD supervisor shared with me a paper she had written a couple of years ago which was rejected, and she included the reviewers’ comments. Reviewer two seemed reasonable, but the first reviewer was quite hostile. They did not appreciate my supervisor trying to (I thought fairly gently) challenge notions around acceptable sexual behaviour in women, clearly finding the article too feminist, to the point that they accused my supervisor of adopting a “combative” position.
I had thought both papers were robust and was surprised that they had been rejected; it made me feel that if these experienced academics were getting negative feedback, what hope was there for me at the beginning of my publishing career? I’m quite sensitive to rejection and to criticism that feels personal and I’ve begun to develop a dread of reviewer feedback. I discussed the issue with my supervisors, who made it plain that the sting of negative reviewer comments never really goes away no matter how much you have dealt with it in the past.
Raising the topic on social media, I received this advice from seasoned author Dr Anne Leader (leaderannephd.bsky.social):
“If it does (get rejected), just shake it off and immediately send it to the next place.”
She acknowledged that some of the criticism she has received genuinely hurt and told me that in one case the feedback was “a scathing ad hominem attack”, but she also felt that her paper was a much better article now for the reshaping and resubmission. That all sounded rather gruelling, to say the least.
So I decided to take pre-emptive action and signed up for a short course run by The Academic Writing Studio called Dealing With Reviewer Comments. The course is largely self-directed, consisting of reading and practical exercises, but includes one live group coaching session which I attended yesterday afternoon. Jo VanEvery, who runs The Academic Writing Studio, starts from the premise that your work is absolutely publishable and you need to hold onto that. However, your paper won’t be right for every journal, and reviewer comments will reflect this; that doesn’t mean though that it won’t be right for your second or third choice journal. Jo gave me some good concrete advice on everything from picking the right journal to how you approach reading the feedback and what you do with the emotions it generates. One thing that has particularly stayed with me is Jo’s wise suggestion not to consider myself over-sensitive, therefore making myself upset about being upset – visceral emotions are quite normal in this situation and the last thing any of us needs is “meta upset”!
I now have a specific plan for dealing whatever comes back to me from my submission. I will be treating anything other than a simple desk rejection as a win, because it would indicate that my article has something promising about it, even if it needs a lot more work. While I’m waiting, I’m going to follow Jo’s recommendation that I select a few other journals I would like to submit to, and give some thought to what I would need to change in order to submit my article there. Then if and when I do get a rejection, I can get straight back on the horse, tweak my work, and get it out there again. And, if necessary, again…
