In academia, a real, though contentious, evaluation of a scholar's worth is the amount and quality of one's publications. As an early career scholar, I've had the fortune of working with an advisor who is well-published and well-versed in the business of publishing in scholarly journals. She has shared her own process of rejection or revise and resubmit and helped me develop a stronger skin when reading reviews of my own work. One disposition that I've developed because of her is gratitude for a rejection letter that also provides feedback. Although reading critiques of my work is tough, I try to cultivate thankfulness to the person who actually took the time to read my manuscript. Kirsten Bell, a Research Associate at University of British Columbia, has written some Random Reflections on Getting Published which have been influenced by her work as an editor and author. She highlights a few things I haven't thought about before and it is well worth a read. She encourages authors to think about the following things.
- Timing - don't send manuscripts out when everyone else is rushing to get work out (ie. November).
- Worry less about the prestige of the journal and more about making sure your article is accessible. High ranking journals may look better for tenure, but if the article is difficult to access, who will read and cite your work?
- Think twice before requesting reconsideration of a rejected article. It may come off as egotistical and you'd be better off finding a different outlet for your work.
- Reciprocate - and review for journals you submit to. It is only polite and professional, plus, and Bell doesn't state this, you get to know the journal better for your own submissions.
