25 years ago this year I began my PhD studies in the
Department of Philosophy at the University of Bristol.
It was also the first year I entered the
world of academic publishing, having submitted my first paper to an academic
journal (and having them swiftly reject it!)
I thought I would offer some reflections on the past 25 year journey of
academic publishing, limiting my focus in this blog post to publishing in academic
journals.
I preface my comments by noting that the life of an
academic is a privileged and blessed life.
I am so fortunate to have the opportunity to make a living from the life
of an engaged mind. But it is also true
that a life engaged in the world of academic publishing has it’s share of
anguish and anxiety, especially for early career scholars struggling to earn a
living and get some employment stability.
And this blog post was written with aspiring scholars/junior colleagues
in mind. They might profit from hearing some of the experiences I have had on
the “ups” and “downs” of journal publications.
While a graduate student I was desperate to get some of
my work published and starting sending things out to journals. In hindsight this was premature. For the first two years the 2-3 articles I had
submitted were based on graduate work in my MA studies. It was decent work for my courses and MA
thesis, but not publishable research.
All were rejected.
During my first year of the PhD program living in the UK I
remember watching old re-runs of The Waltons, and identifying with John Boy
and his struggles to get published as a writer.
In my first year of the PhD program I saw the episode where John Boy
gets his first publication, after enduring many rejections and
disappointments. I found it an inspiring
tale, and saw myself as an academic version of John Boy (i.e. a nerd’s nerd!). The first two years of publication rejections
seemed like a decade to me.
While a first year doctoral student I also purchased a
copy of the book (pictured above) Guidebook for Publishing Philosophy. I read every page of that book multiple
times, going over the acceptance rate of the journals, the average time to
acceptance/rejection and the circulation numbers of different journals. It was only in the second year of writing my PhD
thesis that my ideas developed more fully into something that was publishable. And I started submitting parts of the PhD thesis
to journals, now with success! I was very
fortunate in that I did have 3 papers (here, here and here) from my PhD
dissertation accepted for publication before my PhD defence in year 3 of the
program (1999).
So when I first went into the job market in 1999 the fact
that I had publications in hand really helped as the UK had a Research
Assessment Exercise coming up in the next year or two and departments were
looking for adding scholars with publications in hand that could help with
their rankings. But even with those
publications I took two fixed lectureship positions before landing a permanent
position at Manchester University.
My own personal triumphs and stresses of journal
publication have evolved and changed over the years. Prior to my first permanent appointment, and
then tenure and eventually promotion to full professor, there were pressing
careerist factors that weighed very heavily on my mind. “Publish or perish!” was certainly a mantra
that I internalized early on as I wasn’t coming from a top ranked university or
program. I knew that publishing was the
only way to make some kind of name for myself in the discipline and (hopefully)
land permanent employment.
Reflecting back on
25 years of persisting through the process of article writing, then submitting
and waiting, then re-submitting, revising, etc. I think it is accurate to say
it is not an easy process (at least for me!).
Nor should it be. Unlike a blog
post, where anyone can write and then hit “publish”, an academic journal has
gatekeepers and stringent criteria for publication. Most submissions to a journal do not meet the
criteria for publication. Even the top
scholars in the world have their work rejected.
One of the things that successful academics must learn to do well is to
live with constant rejections of their journal submissions. This isn’t always easy to do! But some things (like one’s attitude and
perception of the process) can help make it more palatable.
For me, given my personality, I have found that to
persist and flourish with academic publishing I had to consciously cultivate a
kind of paradoxical mindset. On
the one hand, I needed to believe in myself, to have the confidence that my
ideas and what I have written is worthy of being shared with others in a
published journal format. We all have
some self-doubt, and no paper addresses all the relevant literature/ possible
objections, etc. But you have to make
the judgement call as to when your ideas have been developed to a level when
submitting to a journal is appropriate. Self-confidence
and a willingness to risk rejection are needed.
So on the one hand ego (coupled with self-preservation
and curiosity) plays a factor in getting you to submit things for publication in
the first place. And yet, ironically, ego
can also prevent you from submitting, or at least to better publication
venues. If your ultimate goal is to
avoid any journal rejections then there is foolproof strategy for achieving
that- never submit an article for publication!
You need some ego to motivate you
into the publishing game, but not too much ego. I take some pride in being able to say that I
have had my work rejected by some of the best journals in the world. For without that attitude I never would have submitted
my work to the journals that eventually did publish my work.
Maintaining a sense of humility, with no sense of entitlement
to have your work published in any particular journal, is also critical. At the same time you need to have the
confidence, competence and perseverance to write, revise, revise again, go
through editor desk rejections, split referee rejections, R&R rejections, etc. The narrative you tell yourself about your
rejections is perhaps the most critical aspect of this process. You want to avoid characterizing yourself as
a “victim” of unfair editorial or referee reviews. Conversely, you should be aware of the fact
that a lot of luck and happenstance can come into play in the decision-making
process. For some journals your paper
might not be a good fit. What one editor
considers “a timely and significant topic” the editor of a related journal
considers “unoriginal and trivial”. One
referee might have sympathy with the methodological premises of your argument(s)
and yet another is ideologically opposed to your method or conclusions. What one assessor judges to be a “clear “ “original”
and “interesting” contribution another assessor judges to be “unclear” “commonplace”
and “unimaginable”. This is simply the way the journal gods blow. Try not to get too frustrated by this
process. It is what it is.
Even now, over 20 years later, a journal rejection typically
stings for a day or two. But then I move
on and “let it go”, determined to improve the work and submit it to the journal
that will also choose it as its home destination.
It is always good for junior scholars to seek out advice
from different types and ranks of scholars.
My own views are probably something of an outlier view. In my writing I prioritize what I WANT to
write, with only secondary or tertiary consideration for the discipline, let
alone journals, it eventually gets published in. This has its careerist risks, which
fortunately for me haven’t been an obstacle to my career progression. But for most disciplines you write for a
specific sub-field and the few journals that publish in that field. In such a
case you may want to give some thought to which topics are “most relevant” “trendy”,
etc. to increase your odds of success. I
myself prefer to try pave a new direction or tackle neglected issues vs address
what happens to be trendy and current in a field. But my interests and motivations are a bit
out of the norm.
Persisting in academic publishing teaches one resilience,
patience, persistence, humility and it can also adversely impact one’s emotional
wellbeing and even mental health. The stakes are high, one’s career and
familial financial security often relies on success in publishing (especially
in the early stages of a career). Like most things in life, there are good
aspects but also negative aspects. Keep
your eyes open to both of them, self-awareness and insight are important.
A common mistake I often make is to be too forward-looking
in my attitude towards publications.
When I first started my career, and a paper was accepted by a journal I
really took time to appreciate that good news and bask in the sense of
achievement for a while. Unfortunately
now I am typically too focused on the next project that I sometimes forget to stop to
smell the roses. It is important to be
present to the feelings of gratitude and achievement, they help sustain a
scholar through the rejections and revisions.
My career ended up going in different directions from
what I initially anticipated when obsessing with the Guidebook for
Publishing Philosophy as a graduate student 25 years ago. But the book served me very well, showing me
how important it is to do your research in advance, know which journals are a
good fit and how long they take to review and what their prestige in a field is
like.
Putting these rambling reflections together, I can
distill 5 general bits of advice:
#1. Don’t ever have
a sense of entitlement about publications- no journal owes you a publication. You hope that slaving away on a paper for
months, even years, eventually results in a journal publication. It doesn’t always. But hopefully it does more times than
not.
#2. Don’t take journal
rejection personally. Rejections can
sting, especially when split referee reports or after revise and resubmits. But understand this is part of the
publication game. Lick your wounds and
let it go. Holding on to bitterness and
resentment about the process will cause you to have persistent negative
emotional experiences with publishing and, eventually, you may stop submitting work to avoid those negative experiences.
#3. Have humility: critical feedback from editors and referees typically
improves your work and is an important part of the process of developing as a
scholar. Sometimes the negative reports
are the most important kinds of feedback you get. Unlike your colleagues, friends or the
like-minded scholars in your network, an anonymous referee might challenge
premises or assumptions in your work that should be challenged. Judiciously responding to their concerns can
make you a better scholar.
#4. Be present with
gratitude and a genuine sense of accomplishment when publication success does come
your way.
#5. Be sure to
have other hobbies and interests: don’t make
publishing the only focus of your life. Of
course it is an important aspect of one’s career, even calling, but be sure to
live a well balanced life. You need to be
proactive in caring for yourself physically and mentally.
25 years ago I started down the path of trying to get my
academic research published. The first
two years did not yield any results, but I am happy to report that over the
remaining 23 years I have had my work published in the following (30+) journals:
Public Health Ethics
Law and Philosophy
Philosophy of the Social Sciences
British Medical Journal
Journal of Political Science Education
University of Toronto Law Journal
Journal of Value Inquiry
Ratio Juris: An International Journal ofJurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
Politics (twice)
Journal of Applied Philosophy
American Journal of Bioethics (twice)
Bioethics (twice)
Res Publica: A Journal of Legal and SocialPhilosophy
Journal of Medical Ethics (twice)
Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal
Political Studies
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics (twice)
Political Studies Review (twice)
European Journal of Political Theory
Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence
Canadian Philosophical Review
Canadian Journal of Political Science
Hypatia
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences
Preventative Medicine (twice)
The Ethics Forum
Social Philosophy and Policy
QJM: An International Journal of Medicine
Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine
Journals of Gerontology: Biological Sciences (twice)
Rejuvenation Research (thrice)
Nature’s EMBO Reports (twice)
Public Affairs Quarterly
Biogerontology
Journal of Medicine and Philosophy
Politics and Life Sciences
All the best on your journey through the world of
academic publishing!
Cheers,
Colin
