"An Eye-Opening Experience" — SAGE Publishing

... personal encounters with rejection was an eye-opening experience. ... For others, such as myself, these experiences fade into the ether, ... Teaching&Learning Methods Impact Events News About Publishing Back Teaching&Learning OnlineTeaching CriticalThinking Wellbeing Back ResearchMethodsOverview OurMethodsStory Products→ Methodspace→ SAGEOcean→ Back SocialScienceImpact ImpactPublishing Business&Management COVID-19Research StructuralRacism LGBTQIA+Resources Socialandbehavioralsciencemonthlyroundup Back PressReleases WhitePapers Blog Back AboutUs Ourpeople DEI Sustainability Careers Contact "AnEye-OpeningExperience" AdvicefromOneAcademiconRejectionByDr.JoshAckermanThisarticlewasoriginallypublishedunderthetitleof“CommonAcademicExperiencesNoOneTalksAbout:RepeatedRejection,ImpostorSyndrome,andBurnout”inPerspectivesonPsychologicalScience.PreparingforadiscussionatSPSP,andforthiscommentary,aboutpersonalencounterswithrejectionwasaneye-openingexperience.Forsomeofus,regularboutswithrejectedmanuscripts,grantproposals,awardnominations,andsoonmeanthatthesenseoffailureisalwayssalient.Forothers,suchasmyself,theseexperiencesfadeintotheether,formingsomethinglikethe“cosmicnegativitybackground”oftheuniverse,anever-presentbutunseenfeatureofacademiclife.Thisblendingofexperiencesmakesitdifficulttogaugethetruefrequencywithwhichpersonalrejectionoccurs.Thisfrequencycameintofullresolution,however,whenIcreatedashadowCVforourSPSPsymposium(seethe Appendix).ShadowCVsareadarkreflectionofthetypicalCV;theyincludeeverycaseofrejectiononehasencounteredoveracareerratherthanjustthesuccesses,inallofthesamecategoriesyoumightnormallypublicize.ThesememorialstofailureroseinprominencewhenseveralresearcherssharedtheirshadowCVsasawayofnormalizingtheexperiencesweoftendonotdiscussinpolitecompany(e.g., Looser,2015; Stefan,2010),muchlikethegoalofoursymposium.Thesegarneredwidespreadinterest,leadingoneoftheposterstoclaimthathisshadowCV“hasreceivedwaymoreattentionthanmyentirebodyofacademicwork”(Haushofer,n.d.,p.2).AsIputtogethermyownshadowCV,itwasalittledishearteningtorelivemyrejectionsandtorecognizehowsmallthechancesareofnotbeingrejectedinsomepursuits.Forinstance,acrossthevariousacademicjobsforwhichIhaveapplied,Ihavea5.1%successrateofmovingfromapplicationtoon-campusinterviewandonlya2.9%rateofreceivinganoffer.Alsoapparentweretherejectionvalleys,wherenegativeexperiencesclustertogether(e.g.,averysuccessfulcolleaguereportshaving10manuscriptsrejectedinarowandknowinganotherscholarwhohadaround20suchrepetitions).BythetimeIfinisheddocumentingthesefailures,Iwashavingseriousdoubtsaboutmylifechoices.Nowimaginepostingeverythingonabigscreenforhundredsofpeopletosee,ashappenedattheSPSPsymposium.Assomeonewhostruggleswiththespotlight,letusjustsaythisdidnotimprovemyopinionaboutthechoicesIhavemadeinlife.SowhyconstructashadowCV?Itturnsout,Iactuallyfoundtheprocesstobequiteworthwhile;despitethedownturns,italsorevealedtheprogressthathashappenedinmycareer.EvendisplayingitforalltoseewasnotasawfulasIexpected,perhapsbecauseitwascoupledwiththesenseofprogress(ormaybeIshouldthankdissonancereductionandaffectiveforecastingfailures).Irecommendtryingthisexercise.Youmayfindthatyourtrajectorywasbetterthanyourecall,thatyoufeelanincreasedsenseofresilience,orthatalthoughindividualrejectionsstillsting,theyquicklyblurintothatcosmicbackground.AndyoumayevenwanttoshareyourshadowCVwithothers,helpingtobreakthesilencearoundrejectionandnormalizediscussionsabouttheseexperiences.Beyondthisidea,Ihavelearnedanumberoflessonsfromdealingwithrejectionandbysynthesizingbest-practicesuggestionsfromothers(ofcourse,theseareanecdotallessons,andadditionalresearchaddressingthecommonalityandefficacyofthesetechniqueswouldbequitevaluable).Oneis: Donothing.Thispieceofadvicewillnotwinany“mostinspirational”awards,butitmaybeusefulanyway.Considertheimpactofpsychologicaldistanceonhowwefeelandthink(e.g., Bruehlman-Senecal&Ayduk,2015; D’Argembeau&VanderLinden,2004; Gilbert,Pinel,Wilson,Blumberg,&Wheatley,1998).First-timerejectionsinadomainarelikelythemostaffectivelyarousinganddifficulttocopewith.Theseexperiencesmayloomespeciallylargeforresearcherswithfewconcurrentprojects,asaresultofworkinginsmalleracademiccommunities,andforthosewhoseworkinvolvesdifficult-to-reachpopulationsandlongtimehorizons.Noteveryoneisinanequivalentpositiontoabsorbfailure,andnoteveryfailurecanbereadilydismissed.Butitdoesgeteasier(maybenotaloteasier!)aswelearnhowtopredictwhatreviewerswant,howtobetterframeourwork,howtomakebetterdecisions,andhowtoemotionallyregulatefollowingrejection.Knowingthattheintensityofrejectionresponseswillsomewhatdiminishovertimemayhelpstrengthenourresolvetomoveforwardinthefaceofadversity.Tomixmetaphors,wearerunningamarathonthroughaforest,notasprintfromtreetotree.Another,moreactivelessonis: Reframeattributionsforrejection.Likemanyofus,Ihavesometimesattributedpriorrejectionstoaspectsofmyidentity,leadingmetowonderwhetherIwasgoodenoughtosucceedinthisfield.Thistypeofresponseisinterestingbecauseitcontradictsthestandardself-servingattributionalbiasthatoftenaccompanieshighlyself-threateningfeedback(Campbell&Sedikides,1999).Butitisalsoaresponsethatpredictsattritionfromthefielddangerouslywell(Gardner,2009; Lovitts,2001),perhapsbecauseitfeedstheimpostorsyndromeandburnoutdiscussedinlatersectionsofthisarticle.Topersistinresearch,abetterstrategymaybetosometimesassumethatrejectionisnotaboutyouasaperson;itisaboutX,Y,Z,oranynumberofotherexternalreasons.Blinduseofthisstrategyisalsoahallmarkofnarcissism(Stucke,2003),butitcanbeusedinreasonableandproductiveways.Forexample,onemethodofreconstruingrejectionistofocusonthebigpictureofourenterprise.IpublishresearchbecauseIhopetocontributetoalargerdialogue,andIwouldguessmostotherscientistsdoaswell.Rejectionsareoftensimplypartofthisdialogueratherthanstatementsaboutourpersonalfoiblesorabilities.Conversely,bytreatingacceptanceofmanuscriptsorgrantapplicationsasendgoals,wemaylosesightofthebroaderdiscussion’svalueandgiveunnecessaryweighttowhatareessentiallyindividualpointswithinthatdiscussion.Perhapsitisduetoprivilege(andposttenuregoggles?),butIhavefoundthewholeofmyprofessiontobemoremeaningfulfromthisvantagepoint,andeach“no”Ireceivetobelesspowerfulasaresult.Athirdlessonis: Takechargeofwhatyoucan.Justaswemaywanttocelebrateeachofoursuccesses(atleastintheWest; Miyamoto&Ma,2011),wemayalsowanttotakeabreakfollowingeachrejectiontoletimmediatefeelingssubside,asKatereferredtoearlier.Takeawalk,spendtimewithfamily,hitthegym.Dashingoffanangryresponsetoaneditororventingonacademicsocialmediaisunlikelytobesuccessfulorencouragethetypeofprofessionalimageweprobablywanttoconvey.IknowIhavewrittenmany,manysuchresponses,butinsteadoflettingReviewer2knowhowIreallyfeel,Iwalkawayinsteadofsendingtheresponseandrevisitthereviewwithacoolermind.Thatsaid,ifyouarethekindofpersonwhoreactstoadismissingdecisionletterbychurningoutpagesofclear,convincingprose,goforit.Analternatewayoftakingchargeistoheadoffrejectionbeforeitoccurs.Considerthosemanuscriptreviewsyouhavereceivedthathaveanegativetoneandignorewhatyouthinkarethekeypointsofyourwork.Remember,reviewershavelittletimetodevotetoreviewsandaretypicallynotcompensatedfortheirwork,sosmallelements(e.g.,grammar)couldhaveadisproportionateimpactontheirevaluationofamanuscript.Donotignoretheseelementsandexpectthatreviewerswillalsodisregardthem.Proofread!Haveotherslookatyourmanuscriptsbeforesubmittingthem.Sendinthebestworkyoucan.Youhaveprobablyheardtheserecommendationsbefore.Theyarethebaneoftheidealisticscientist,whobelievesthatthehypothesisortheresultisallthatmatters,andnothowtheyarecommunicated.Thepointhereistoknowwhatisinyourcontrolandwhatisnot.Andwhatisdefinitivelyunderyourcontrolissubmittingaproductofwhichyouareproud.Furthermore,youmayhavemorepowerthanyourealizeinmanysituations.Forinstance,inthecontextofjobapplications,applicantswhodonotmaketheshortlistofpromisingcandidatesoftenhearnothingabouttheirstatusfromtargetinstitutions.Withoutanexplicitrejection,howdoyouknowwhentobegincryingintoyourpilloworyourbeer?Eventhoseapplicantswhoaremoreofficiallyspurnedmayreceivenoinputastowhy.Insuchsituations,whynotaskforfeedbackfromhiringcommittees?Youmightnotalwaysreceivethelevelofdetailyouwouldlike,butsomepeoplewillbehappytorespond,andyoulosenothingbyasking.Intheend,takingcontrolofwhicheverpiecesoftheresearchprocessyoucanmayhelpwardoffrejection,oratleasthelpitstingabitless.Fourth: Knowwhatyouaregettinginto. Whengraduatestudentsbeginworkingwithme,Igivethema“handbook”ofarticles,blogposts,andotherpiecesofadviceaboutwhatittakestosucceedinsocialpsychologyspecificallyandacademiamorebroadly.Sometimesthesereflectharshtruths,suchaswhyacademicsstinkatwriting(Pinker,2014)orwhypeopleleaveacademia(PsychBrief,2017).Butmyfavoriterecommendationisacalltoembracethestateofnotknowing,otherwiseknownas“TheImportanceofStupidityinScientificResearch”(Schwartz,2008).Thearticle’scentralthemeisthatthefeelingofstupidity,ornothavingtheanswertoaresearchquestion,isafeatureof—notabugin—thescientificenterprise.Ifresearchersknewalltheanswers,wewouldbeoutofajob!Byrealizingthatourprofessionisonethatgeneratesnewknowledge,uncoversevidence,andengagesinotheractivitiesofdiscovery,notonethatinvolveshavingtheanswersupfront,Ithinkpeoplecanbecomemoreacceptingofthefactthatrejectionmusthappenforprogresstooccur.Amorefield-specificbitofknowledgeinvolvestheimportanceofrecognizingbaserates.Whenitcomestosuccessfullyapplyingforjobs,grants,andevenconferencepresentationslots,havinggoodideasisnotallthatmatters.Largenumbersofourcolleaguesmaybecomparablyqualifiedandproduceequallygoodwork.When200applicationsaresubmittedforasinglefacultyposition,forexample,manyverystrongcandidateswillnot(andcannot)bechosen.Inthisprofession,wearenottrainedtoembracetheconceptofluck.Itexists,though,andweshouldgiveitcredit(aslongaswedonotallowthisrecognitiontounreasonablydiminishourmotivation).Myfinalpieceofadviceisdirectedlesstorecipientsofrejectionandmoretothosewiththestructuralpowertoinfluencerecipientexperiences.Andthatis: Domore.Asamentor,colleague,chair,oreditor,eachofushastheabilitytoimprovethepersonalexperiences(andworkplacesandlives)ofthepeoplewithwhomwework.Indepartmentalmeetingsandatconferences,beawareofthedynamicsofprovidingfeedbackandthewaysinwhichcriticalcommentscanbeframedascollaborativeratherthanrejecting.Whentrainingstudentsorjuniorfaculty,wehaveevenmorepower.Buildnewnormsintoyourtraining.Consideronestrategyforseparatingourselvesfromtheexperienceofrejectionbystoppingthepracticeofequatinghypotheseswithpersonalpredictions(Schaller,2016).“I/wehypothesize”islanguagethatassociatesthesuccessandfailureofthehypothesistestwiththeresearcher,nottheidea.Agoodhypothesisshouldstandonitsown,notonthebackofwhoevergeneratedit.Byexplicitlyavoidingtheconnectionofone’sidentitytoone’sideas,thefocusiskeptonthoseideasandnotonfeelingpersonallyrejectediftheideasarequestionedordisregarded.Disassociatingourselvesfromourhypothesesmightevenhavetheaddedbenefitofimprovingthereproducibilityofourworkasweremovepersonalbiasesanddesiresfromthehypothesis-creationprocess.Wecanalsotrainmenteestobecomebetterrejecters.Whenhavingstudentsparticipateinjournalorgrant-reviewexercises,includefeedbackonthetoneofthosereviews,notjusttheircontent.Finally,everyjournaleditorshouldfollowaruleofeditingorblockingneedlessnegativityandadhominemattacksfromreviewersbeforereleasingreviewstoauthors.Thereisnovalueinbeingpassiveonthisissue.Together,smallstructuralchangeslikethese,coupledwithmoreopencommunicationaboutrejection,mayhelpimprovethestatusquoforeveryone. ResearchPublishingGuestUserJuly23,2020Comment Facebook0 Twitter Tumblr Pinterest0 0Likes Previous "RejectionisNotFailure" ResearchPublishingGuestUserJuly24,2020Tips Next WhatCanInstitutionsDotoAddressNeedsInsecurity? StructuralRacism,WellbeingGuestUserJuly3,2020structuralracism,Inequality