Why I share my paper rejection (from a junior researcher’s perspective)
7 min readAug 1, 2020
This tweet is the beginning of my story.
As a junior researcher (last-year PhD student with ~200 followers on Twitter), I didn’t expect my tweet to get this much attention (more likes than my followers!). It feels like I’m accomplishing even more than getting my ASE paper accepted… Joking aside, it seems people love this idea, so I wanted to share my thoughts behind this decision for people who are also considering this.
Note that I’m in a junior researcher’s mindset. This means I still care a lot about the outcome of my papers (tenure is still in a far-away Disneyland!), I still get hurt when I get rejected, and I still question why reviewer#2 exists… So as a junior researcher, this decision of sharing my rejections isn’t easy, and actually took some consideration and courage. In the end, I think it will do more good than harm, but what do I know? This is just the beginning of my experiment and we’ll see how it goes. :) I’ll share updates in this article if I change my mind or anything comes up (mental breakdown, eh?).
OK let’s get started! I’ll list my reasons on why I think sharing (academic) bad news (e.g., paper rejections) might not be a bad idea, even for junior researchers who still face the tenure pressure and want to be seen as successful.
- Recent News vs. Shadow CV
First off, I’m aware of shadow CV but I think “recent news” on my website is a better place to share rejections (I don’t want to call them “failures” because they are not :)). As a junior researcher, CV format feels too formal for me to share rejections and it reminds me of all those unpleasant experiences at once. Just by seeing the pages (or even lines) grow, it would give me negative feelings and can demotivate me. Also, due to its formal nature, it will be more time-consuming to maintain than just a few quick words in “recent news”.
Again, I’m speaking as a junior researcher who generally attaches more personal emotions on rejections, so I don’t want to spend too much time on looking at or thinking about my rejections. If you’re a senior researcher or a junior researcher who can detach your feelings easily from those rejections, then I think shadow CV is great! Especially if you’re already well-known, shadow CV is more comprehensive and well-organized, which can really encourage junior researchers to overcome their current difficulties.
“Recent News” section on the other hand, doesn’t have those “drawbacks” of shadow CV mentioned above. First, I can only see 5 recent news on my website (i.e., 5 rejections at most), and I mix both good news and bad news together instead of only seeing bad news like on the shadow CV. Second, it’s super quick to do and then you can just move on instead of wallowing for too long... Third, nobody checks your website everyday and the bad news won’t get much attention actually, so putting it on “recent news” makes me less self-conscious. Finally, due to the recent nature of news, it feels like something temporary and reinforces “this too shall pass…”. - A Feeling of Closure
Amy J. Ko wrote a great article on handling rejections (“dealing with academic criticism”) with mindful strategies from coping with negative emotions to eventually moving on to the to-dos. Yes, everyone experiences negative emotions and goes through different phases after getting the rejection. I don’t know how long it takes you to go from “Why God why!” to “Oh well…”, but I noticed that just by putting my rejection out there can really speed up this process.
After updating my website, it gave me a feeling of closure and helped me to move on so that I can focus on what to *do* next instead of being overly emotional. BTW, if you noticed, I intentionally put “oh well, onward and upward!” at the end of my rejection news. This is a psychological trick that can really make you feel so! Similar philosophy as “fake it until you make it”. :) - Rejected Papers Take Effort Too
First of all, let’s admit it. There’s at least some degree of randomness in the paper outcomes, which means it does depend on luck sometimes. There are many studies about this and it’s outside the scope of this article. But one straightforward example would be The NeurIPS Experiment that showed inconsistency of the paper outcomes reviewed by 2 sets of PCs. I’m not saying this as “sour grapes” since I just got my ASE paper rejected. In fact, I have to admit that I also got lucky before (benefiting from the randomness). For example, I had a paper accepted with 2 weak rejects and 1 weak accept initially. Luckily, it went into discussion and involved 2 additional reviewers who both voted yes.
Given the randomness, I think the rejected papers also deserve some attention (no discrimination on papers with different journeys! :)). The rejected papers don’t take any less effort than accepted papers. In fact, they often take even more efforts to get published eventually. They are not “bad” papers, but just have a tough journey for various reasons and need more care to mature. So for junior researchers, when you still count the number of your publications, I think showing rejected papers also demonstrates all the hard work you have put in! It also gives a sense of progress. - Reducing Imposter Syndrome
Probably everyone in academia suffers from imposter syndrome at some point. I think if more people can share their rejections, it actually might reduce imposter syndrome overall. The reason is that we always *only* see successful stories of other people, but we see *all kinds of* stories of our own. In other words, the “dataset” we use to judge someone’s achievement is very very biased. With this bias, it’s very easy for us to think we are a fake (i.e., imposter syndrome). Why not? Look at all the successes others have and all the failures I experienced! This, of course, is not true and is a very biased conclusion. (Hey you know what I’m talking about researchers! There’s a huge threat to validity in the “dataset”, right?)
Imagine a new world where everyone is transparent on their rejections. First, you’ll see your role models are also “human beings”! They also have many failures (usually more than you think! e.g., see Jon Whittle’s comment on my tweet). This can bring your unrealistic expectations on yourself to a more realistic level.
For example, earlier in my PhD, I used to think all those Google Fellows, MSR Fellows, FB Fellows etc are so far away from me. It feels like they are from Mars or something who have their research all figured out! This perception completely changed until I became an MSR Fellow... It was so weird to see my picture on MSR’s website under “fellowship recipients”. I used to look at those pictures like I’m looking at “God”! 😂 Now since I also got the fellowship, this means my (imaginary) standard of getting those fellowships must be wrong — the fellowships are not just for “geniuses from Mars”, but for human beings like me too! At that time, I suddenly realized it’s possible that other fellows feel the same way… This indicates that we often have a ridiculous perception of other people’s achievements and feel they are beyond our reach. But by knowing your role model’s failures (i.e., knowing they’re human beings also), you’ll have a much more realistic expectation to evaluate yourself, and can reach further than you thought you could!
Also, in this personal example, it’s totally possible that I could have not gotten those types of fellowships in my PhD. Then I might hold my old ridiculous standard forever. This can harm my future students since I will know their “failures” too and may think they don’t qualify for those fellowships when they do!
Second, even you don’t see other’s “failures”, by sharing your own rejections, you can also reduce your imposter syndrome in my opinion. Imposter syndrome means you feel you are a fake and don’t deserve all the honors that other people think you do because “What do they know? They don’t see my failures and they don’t know the real me”. But if you actually show them your “failures” and show the “real you”, then what’s there to fear? So sharing rejections actually makes me feel more relieved and less fake. - You Have the Full Control
Finally, I want to emphasize that you have the full control of sharing what you want and what you don’t. This should NEVER be a burden for you or anything unpleasant to do. I myself care a lot about my mental health and I found it beneficial for me to share the rejections for all the things I discussed above (at least for now). As I mentioned earlier, if my mind is changed at any point, I’ll write lessons learned to update this article.
This “mental health comes first” principle is another reason for me to choose “recent news” as the place to share my rejections because it’s super flexible. There are no rigorous guidelines on what qualifies as news (unlike formal CV), so I get to decide what I want to share. For now, I’m committing to sharing all future paper rejections, but at the same time, I also have the full control of sharing *any* good news (even teeny-tiny achievements if I feel like!). This can help me balance out the vibe of my “recent news” to stay positive. You choose your own “poison”. :)
At the same time, since there are no guidelines on sharing bad news, I want to give a word of caution — when you see people’s bad news (like mine) or shadow CV, please keep in mind that the data can still be biased since people are always more motivated to share good news. So the list of rejections may be less comprehensive than the successes. Don’t beat yourself up if you feel other people don’t have as many rejections as you do!
Alright, those are my thoughts behind this decision from a junior researcher’s perspective. This is only the beginning of my experiment and of course, there’s unforeseen future waiting for me. I will document the milestones of my experiment in the table below, such as change of mind or perspective (one day I’ll be in a senior researcher’s mindset!), things to watch out when adopting this approach, and my epiphanies if there’s any.
Oh well, let’s see how it goes!
