The Philosophers' Cocoon

A safe and supportive forum for philosophers.

Owned & Moderated by Marcus Arvan (University of Tampa)

Contact: marvan@ut.edu

Blog mission & moderation policy

IMPORTANT NOTE on how to ensure anonymity in commenting
Job-Market Reporting Thread (2025-26)
Job-Market Discussion Thread (2025-26)

recent posts

about

Grappling with journal-rejection-fatigue on the tenure track?

In our November “how can we help you?” thread, a reader writes:

I am a junior faculty member (2 years post-PhD) and I am writing to ask for advice on how to cope with severe burnout and rejection fatigue.

Here is my situation: I currently have three papers in circulation. Over the past two years, they have faced a cumulative total of 13 rejections. The most painful blow was recently receiving a rejection after a grueling round of R&R that took months of work.

My mid-term evaluation is approaching, and as of now, I have zero publications to show for my time. To make matters worse, it feels like many of my peers and friends are landing hits in top journals, which exacerbates my anxiety.

At this point, I feel psychologically paralyzed. My confidence has taken such a hit that I am struggling to find the courage to even look at my drafts, let alone revise them again. I feel stuck in a cycle of shame and avoidance.

I would be grateful for any advice from this community. How do you emotionally handle this level of serial rejection? For those who have been in a similar “slump,” how did you manage to break the paralysis and recover your productivity?

I am sorry that the OP is going through this. I went through something similar early in my career and recall very well how stressed and defeated I felt. Although I’m just one person, I did happen upon an answer that worked well for me. Here’s more or less what happened.

First, I received advice that I needed to get more work under review. Given how high journal rejection rates are and how long peer-review takes, I was advised that one needs more than just a few papers under review. For what it’s worth, I’d recommend the same thing to the OP. I don’t think revising their 3 existing papers repeatedly is the best way to spend their time. Reviewers are both diverse and fickle, and there is no guarantee that revising the papers to satisfy one set of reviewers will satisfy the next set of reviewers. Instead, the OP should keep sending out those papers but spend more time producing new papers. Alas, given how discouraged/burnt-out they are, I imagine motivation to do that may be difficult.

This brings me to what “changed the game” for me. I too was burnt out and discouraged. So instead of worrying about publishing, I decided to just start writing up arguments on ideas that I found interesting. Seriously, that’s it: I remember coming to something like the following realization: “If I am going to fail at this career, I at least want to go out doing work that I enjoy and that feels authentic to me.” So, I started drafting up new papers, one after another, just trying to enjoy the work. And voila, it actually worked! I started enjoying my work again, produced a bunch of papers (ending up with maybe 10 under review), and although I still dealt with lots of rejections, I started getting acceptances. Then, once I started getting things accepted, the pressure dissipated a bit and I kept things up.

I don’t know if this same approach will work for the OP. We’re all different, after all. But I wanted to share it, just in case it helps.

Do any readers have any helpful insights/experiences to share?

Posted in ,

7 responses to “Grappling with journal-rejection-fatigue on the tenure track?”

  1. Anonymous

    This is a tough situation. Sorry to hear OP is going through it. It is such a grind. But you can do it.

    I remember hearing advice to always have a paper under review, another one being revised, and another being drafted. Several other ideas come to mind:

    First, don’t worry about journal quality for now. (That’s a BS value judgement, anyway, despite the fact that many people in higher ed buy into it.) Get some pubs, build your confidence, then get higher ranked pubs later. So, like Marcus says, keep sending out the drafts you already have. When you get a rejection, immediately send that paper out again, and *while it is out* consider whether it needs revision for the *next* submission, dropping down a rank each time until you have something accepted. It sounds like giving up, perhaps, but it is reasonable to expect that you will improve as an article-writer as your career advances, and that your later pubs will be in higher ranked journals. Specialist might be easier than generalist journals, depending on topic.

    Second, one of the difficulties of this situation is lack of community, so be intentional about building it. Send out some conference papers, co-author with someone, join or form a writing group among other junior professors at your university. The latter is especially helpful, I think. Just make sure it doesn’t turn into a festival of complaining: An hour or two of silent writing together, once or twice a week, can help you focus and feel the joy of the process again. Having a larger group (6-10?) might help ensure that there is always a critical mass, even when folks get busy or drop out of the group. Your Teaching and Learning Center might already organize these things, or might be willing to start doing so.

    Third, for the mid-term evaluation, get on top of the optics now. Talk with your chair about the fact that you have been active but with no success yet. (But no whining.) Mention journal rejection rates at the places you have been submitting. Ask about expectations and recommended strategies for passing mid-term review under the circumstances.

    Reply
  2. best wishes

    The advice so far sounds excellent. I want to provide some comfort by pointing out how common these post-* slumps are. It could be post-ABD, post-Phd, or post-tenure. I happen to escape some of these standard slumps, but fall into a slump out of nowhere (or post some psychological stage). Whatever the post is, the slump itself feels terrible and a hit to confidence. And I bet that OP’s situation is more relatable to any philosopher than OP might think.

    Reply
  3. Anonymous

    I think if you keep getting the same three papers rejected – 13 times, that is averaging 4.33 times per paper – you should begin to work on some new projects. I am later in my career, but I generally toss a paper if it is not accepted after three times. YES THREE TIMES. I know the “going wisdom” is to keep sending stuff out again and again. But I have had this strategy all of my career – and it has worked. You need to pick the right journal for your papers. And, as someone remarked, perhaps set your goals a little lower until you get one paper accepted.
    One other strategy is to have a friend read the most recent referee reports and then repackage the message in a way that takes the sting out of it but still helps you improve the paper.

    Reply
  4. Anonymous

    There are journals that desk reject a lot, and some that almost sends everything out for review. If your paper is always desk rejected, try the other type of journals; vice versa.

    And I would be tempted to say that rejections are not very good indicators of quality. My most rejected paper turned out to be my most cited paper; and it also happens to be the most cited among all the papers on that very topic. Some of my papers that had very smooth processes, on the other hand, feel extremely boring to me.

    I also think that much of the above comments are very helpful. Try to build a small working group, or have friends of similar interests. Write on what you are passionate about.

    Reply
  5. Daniel

    I’m also in the middle of a huge string of consecutive rejections (although it’s less stressful for me, since I am tenured) so I know the feeling, but what I usually tell myself is that this is has no more reason to influence my self-esteem than pulling the lever on a slot machine and not winning. Bad luck is annoying but nothing to beat yourself up about. Bad luck can have bad results for your life, so you don’t need to pretend everything is fine, but in terms of confidence, experiencing a string of bad luck shouldn’t mean anything.

    Reply
  6. OP

    OP here! Thanks everyone for all the kind and helpful suggestions. I am feeling much better now and can finally see my situation in a different light. I’ve come to realize that there are many random factors unrelated to quality that can influence the fate of a submission. Looking back at the referee reports, I can now see they mostly reflect deep philosophical disagreements rather than fundamental flaws in my work. I will learn to accept bad luck as an unavoidable part of this career and strive to keep moving forward.

    Reply
  7. Anonymous

    I am in the “try to do good work, but then treat it like a lottery” camp. There is just so much randomness. So, it is best to have a lot of submissions out at a given time, rather than focusing on creating perfect pieces (unless one is at a point in their career where they can be more selective).

    When I needed publications early in my career, I submitted six pieces that I had prepped or that were edited grad school papers. The two I take to be the worst were published on first try. The one I take to be the best received double-digit rejections before being accepted. There is a lot of randomness, and we are not great judges of which papers unknown reviewers might support or not.

    For the same reason, I think that those who really need to publish should only edit their rejected papers if the comments point out a significant problem that you agree is a problem. Editing a paper to satisfy the last reviewer will likely do nothing to change the next reviewer’s mind.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to DanielCancel reply

Discover more from The Philosophers' Cocoon

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading