My journal article manuscripts have been rejected many times in the past. I knew that it is a routine of a researcher.
In reality, it is not easy to emotionally deal with it. I have worked several months including a revision that was requested by a journal editor. I was, however, informed that my paper was rejected for publication in the journal.
What is your know-how of emotionally deal with it?
Hi Don,
Yes - it is a common experience - especially in today's highly competitive publication environment. My advice is to have a good strategy in place i.e. have a list of five appropriate journals to target - starting with the highest impact. The expectation is that the first one or two articles stand a higher chance of rejection. However, you will hopefully receive good reviewer advice to help re-shape and re-craft your manuscript so that, hopefully, one of your target journals will accept it. If you keep getting rejected - even after amending your article - for similar reasons - then it may be safe to assume that it will not get published and move onto publishing your next project. The attached chapter may assist in planning for manuscript submission.
Dear Dean,
Thank you so much for your sincere advice, although my question was on emotional response rather than tactical response.
To be clear, my question was what your strategy not to EMOTIONALLY be affected by paper rejection.
Thanks again.
Don
Hi Don,
Not a problem. I like to think that my response addresses both emotional and tactical/strategic approaches. The more that one approaches the whole process in a 'structured' manner - the less likely that it will be an emotional experience. The more 'ad hoc' the approach the more likely that the review/editorial criticism might be rationalised at the emotional level. The book chapter that I attached also assists in trying to take out the emotions involved i.e. that reviewers/editors are normal people looking to support authors, on a voluntary basis, as best they can.
I accept that and try to improve my writing way, as well I review my paper as it may not meets the standards of that journal..
To all,
I do not blame an editor or reviewers at all. Most of the time, they are fair. i always appreciate their time and efforts.
I have also served as a reviewer for many manuscripts, and I have provided the decision of rejection for many manuscripts based in my evaluations.
But it is not happy for being rejected, although I do not blame others.
Thanks for your answers.
Don
Dear Don Soo Chon
As you know All researchers, even the very best ones, have papers rejected. Even the very best papers get rejected. Part of the reason for this is that in many cases, the peer review process is non-deterministic. You might be unlucky and get assigned reviewers whose expertise does not fit for your paper, reviewers who do not have time to do a good job, or reviewers who simply are bad at reviewing (in that they are petty, insulting, stubborn, or resistant to change and new ideas). Having a paper rejected is not the end of the world, and it does not mean that your idea or your paper is bad. It just means that the people who reviewed your paper for that specific academic venue did not like it.
You could follow these steps to handle the rejection:
Take a minute to accept what happened
Read the rejection letter
Make sure you follow the author instructions
Match your paper to the journal
Resubmit to the same journal, or submit to a new journal
Sir,
Paper rejection is another chance for improvement,
May not come under the domain of journal,
Way to handle it- I am accepting it,
Improve and resubmit
Dear Son,
"How do you emotionally deal with your paper rejection?" -- You ask.
I understand well your question. I guess that no researcher feels good and happy when s/he has his/her paper rejected. This feeling can be lessened if we become aware that:
1) It is likely that no researcher has all of his/her submissions accepted.
2) Good papers are often rejected, and poor papers are published at times.
3) The blind peer-review system is not always blind.
4) There is much inbreeding in the peeer-review system,
5) If one's paper goes, say, against "sacred cows" in any scientific domain, then the possibility of having his/her paper rejected increases.
6) There are good and bad reviwers and god and bad Editors-in.Chief.
7) To have a paper rejected is not a disgrace nor is it a disaster,
8) It may be the case that you can improve your paper taking into account reviewers' good comments, suggestions, and so forth,
9) You can submitt your paper to a different Journal.
10) It may also happpen that you come to see that your paper did not deserve to be published and you would be disastisfied while reading it after being published.
In a nutshell we have to learn how to deal with a reject decision. This decision is not a disaster in your life. You can learn a lot from such a decision mainly when it is well grounded and justifed.
Let me say that I have pulished a lot in leading journals, and in the most of the cases I have to perform several revisions, four, for example. I know of brilliant researchers who have their papers subject to several revisions or even rejected,
Kind regards,
Orlando
I think taking courage to look at the issues raised in the paper is one good way
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publication