I came across a conference open call earlier this year that I felt really aligned with so I decided to submit a paper around a theory I’ve been playing with. Outside of genuine interest, I also did it because I’m currently planning to use the submitted paper as a writing sample for my doctoral applications, and because I’m pretty new to research—though I hold a operations staff role within a grad program. To that note, apologies if this post question is weird, I don’t know anyone in academia and I’ve just been using this subreddit (and others) to find kinship!
Anyway, I’ve heard a lot about the horrors of “reviewer 2” in my year of preparations but I was surprised that I feel motivated (and adrenaline?) after reading my feedback; and that my writing sample finally has a chance to reach the standards it needs to.
Is this a rare occurrence?
Comments
Just submitted my own research paper for a conference is universe giving me a sign xD
It’s not rare. I’ve only ever had one bad experience with a reviewer. ‘Reviewer 2’ is usually code for “wahhhh but I don’t wanna do all that!”
(By bad, I mean rude, disrespectful, not constructive at all.)
It might be hard to believe but most academics are not complete assholes. Many actually care about supporting young researchers.
The quality of review is very luck of the draw. Sometimes you get a good review that helps improve your paper. Sometimes you get a review from someone who clearly did not read your paper or put any time into the review. And sometimes you get a completely off the walls review. And all of this can happen on the same paper.
I’m glad you had helpful reviewers, and you think their comments can improve your presentation.
The only “bad” reviews I’ve had are times when the reviewers just really didn’t understand what I was trying to do with the paper, and that’s ultimately on me. (There were mitigating factors – what I was trying to do was at a pretty odd angle to most work on the topic in my field, so they weren’t primed for it – but at the end of the day your job as the author is to communicate, and 2/3 didn’t get it.) Otherwise I’ve had mostly constructive and positive reviews, and even the less favorable ones have never upset me. I think a lot of people have too much of their self-worth tied up in the pub process, to be honest with you, and it leads to a lot of emotional reactivity.
There isn’t any fixed rule for this. I’m not hugely experienced but some of my rejections have been savage and petty, and it’s because of my topic. Some super polite but not helpful in improving the paper. The nastiest rejection also had good advice amongst the vitriol and the paper was published by the journal after revision anyway. I am glad you got constructive advice on your first rejection though.
First congrats on getting things out there. Rejection is part of the process, but you can only be rejected on things that you submit. So nice work!
As far as feedback, it is a crap shoot. Sometimes it is amazing and thoughtful feedback that once you finish reading and nodding through it, you know exactly what you want and need to do to make the work way better. Most of the time, there are a few useful things to pull out, and then there is Reviewer #2
Congrats!
You submitted a whole manuscript for a potential poster presentation?
You have experience, if you get feedback you can submit somewhere else.