When the Goose Lays a Lead Egg: Seeing Past Rejection and Learning from Reviewers

We don't always get what we want... right? We all know that. But its easy to forget that when most things you touch turn to gold. After a recent journal submission was returned with requests for significant changes I was more than disappointed. I was shocked! But why? 

Clinical and academic research can feel, at times, like a zero-sum game. At the doctoral level many grants and scholarships only have one winner; and winners tend to keep on winning. Essentially, if you aren't funded, you are less likely to stay in the field. This is especially true in the Nursing field, where RNs with a bachelor's or associate's degree can make a good living working on the floor. (Often this is twice the annual take-home salary of a funded PhD student). There is limited funding to go around, so those who aren't awarded a generous stipend must work (either as a TA or in an external position) and these efforts cut-into their study/reading/writing/THINKING time.

If you are one of the lucky ones who get funding, you have more time to focus on creating opportunities for yourself within the department. You can attend conferences, work with a tenure-track professor and (hopefully) get added to their publication or just have more face-time with experienced scientists who will benefit your methodological and overall study design. What results from this system is that the initial fundee gets more exposure and more refinement and they become an even better applicant for future funding.

I'm not trying to critique the system- there are good and bad parts- and I have certainly benefitted from it as described. I'm grateful for the funding, opportunities and guidance I have received... but I have to also acknowledge that a side effect of this system is that I have gotten used to winning- and not winning can feel like being dashed with a bucket of cold water.

Getting back to the article that I submitted- I must admit, it took me a moment to process the rejection. When I saw the email from the journal in my inbox, my first reaction was: "Oh, good. They are sending some feedback, and now I can move-on to the next submission." I am shocked by the unconscious egotism in my response. When I read their comments, I closed my laptop and texted my husband. I wasn't reeling, but close.

He texted me back possibly the most helpful thing he could have: "You are so used to everything you touch turning to gold, you forgot what its like when things don't go your way." Brilliant. Such an important comment. Why was I surprised that a well-respected, scientific journal had a few negative comments about my (a doctoral candidate's) work? Who exactly do I think I am?

His insight allowed me a moment to shift my thinking and gave me some mental space to look critically at the reviewers' comments. On second look, I agreed with many of the points they made. There were places I could have been more clear about my methods, other places I could have made harder distinctions between diagnostic terminologies... etc...etc. In short, their comments were helpful and well-intentioned. I believe that making the majority of their suggested changes WOULD make for a more effective and coherent paper.

They offered me the gift of rejection: a chance to critically look at my work from an outsider's perspective, a chance to improve, a chance to consider issues that never occurred to me or the other authors. They gave me the chance to try again. And I intend to.

As Henry Ford once said, "Failure is simply the opportunity to begin again, this time more intelligently.” I believe in this quote, but by far my favorite of the moment is this gem, used in various Pinterest posts and spread across many a first-gen Latina doctoral student FB page:

"I didn't come this far to come this far." Just watch me.