If I knew then what I know now. A series in which I look back at my own academic career and talk about things I would do differently. The rest of the series can be accessed here.
This week, publishing in the wrong places.
First, a bit of background. I’m a feminist sociologist. My research was about gender and family. As I used to tell my students, I know a lot about housework in a way that my mother thinks is totally useless. So the example here is about housework but it can be applied to any field.
Publishing in “safe” places
The paper that I am most proud of is a critique of the way housework is conceptualized in most sociological work on the subject. I presented Understanding Gendered Inequality: Reconceptualizing Housework at a small conference where I received some good feedback and participated in some very interesting conversations. It was exactly the kind of conference you wish was more common. All about the intellectual stimulation and sharing ideas.
The conference organizers were putting together a special issue of Women’s Studies International Forum and asked if they could include my paper. I was excited. What a wonderful confirmation of the value of my argument. I accepted readily.
Publishing in the special issue was safe. There was no uncertainty. I had been invited to submit the paper by the editors. They knew what was in it. They thought it was good enough. They might give feedback and ask for revisions but the paper would definitely be published.
I didn’t understand a lot about impact at the time. But I knew that Women’s Studies International Forum is a peer-reviewed journal. It is a well respected women’s studies journal. There was a review process for the special issue though I didn’t ask much about it nor understand what the significance of that would be. But I didn’t think that I was publishing badly. And I wasn’t.
If I knew then what I know now
Women’s Studies International Forum is a well respected journal. My article has been cited. By people who are not my friends and relations. Clearly it has had an impact on the advancement of knowledge albeit a small one.
The conference was excellent. The conference organizers and editors of the special issue had very good intentions and they put together a good special issue. But …
The debate that I most wanted to influence with that paper was not the debate in women’s studies. It was the general sociological research on the division of household labour.
That debate is not happening in Women’s Studies International Forum, and never has been. Most of the sociologists researching the division of household labour do not read Women’s Studies International Forum.
The journal that is most likely to have an impact on the advancement of knowledge in this particular area is the Journal of Marriage and the Family.
Before you get all “who does she think she is” on me, I readily admit that I have no idea if my article is good enough to be published in the Journal of Marriage and the Family (JMF). I will never know. I never submitted it there. At the time I didn’t even consider sending it there.
Submitting to a prestigious journal is scary
When faced with a sure thing, I didn’t even stop to consider it. I was only thinking of “getting published”. It was a refereed journal. Surely it counts?
I had forgotten that the point of publishing is to take part in intellectual debates and maybe even influence them.
I got distracted by the fact that the people who judge us (for hiring, for promotion, for the Research Assessment Exercise, or whatever) count our publications. And seem to value refereed journals over other things.
I didn’t fully understand what they were counting. Or why they valued refereed publications. I didn’t really understand impact.
More importantly, I lost site of my intellectual purpose.
What is the worst that could have happened?
When I’m contemplating something scary, I like to think about the worst case scenario. It often helps get things into perspective.
In this case, I could have sent it to JMF and been rejected.
Compared to the high of presenting it at a conference and having more important people in your discipline tell you that they like it and offer to publish it, that might feel like a kick in the guts. Were they lying? Was it really no good at all? Are the people at the conference really a bunch of losers? Scary. Why would I turn down a sure thing to face this possibility?
Furthermore, that might have taken 6 months to a year. Months in which I don’t have that publication on my CV for people to count should they need to count things. And then my sure thing is gone. The special issue will have a different article in it and might even be in press. So then I would have had nothing.
Sounds awful. A crazy idea. Why would I even consider it.
The worst case scenario is not as bad as it looks
Even in that worst case, I would have had reviewers comments on the article from reviewers in the field that I was trying to influence. I would have gained valuable information about how to have an impact on the advancement of knowledge in that particular field.
This might have led to a different paper, further development of my ideas, or publication in a different journal that might be somewhat less prestigious than JMF but more widely read by mainstream sociologists studying the division of household labour. And thus higher impact.
And I could still have submitted the article to WSIF later. Unless their special issue process is really weak, I should have had a good chance of having the article published in a regular issue.
What is the best thing that could happen?
And let’s not forget. My article might have been accepted (with or without revisions). And in that best-case scenario, the likelihood of having an impact on the way that research on the division of household labour is conducted would have been much higher.
What difference does that make? Well, it might have made a difference to my promotion prospects, or to the result my department had in the Research Assessment Exercise, or to my ability to secure a research grant. But more importantly, it would have influenced the people that I most wanted to influence.
I wrote that paper to raise those questions amongst researchers in that field and to influence the way that they designed their studies.
I didn’t write that paper for promotion, or to get a grant, or to improve my department. I wrote that paper because I thought that there were serious conceptual weaknesses in almost all of the research on the division of household labour. And I wanted other researchers to address those weaknesses when they design new studies.
What this means for you
You write papers for similar reasons.
You have important things to say to other researchers in your field. Your findings or insights are important. You have an important contribution to make to the debates in your field.
The point of publishing your research is to communicate with other researchers, researchers you might never meet in person. The point is to make an impact on the advancement of knowledge. In order to do that, you have to publish in the place that is most likely to have the maximum impact.
Journals are better than edited books because they are abstracted and indexed and searchable by article. Even people who don’t usually read that particular journal might come across your article if they are doing a database search for literature on a relevant topic. Well respected journals in your field, with a large international readership are likely to have a higher impact because more people in your field are likely to come across your article whether they are specifically looking for it or not.
It is terrifying
Definitely. You are not wrong to be scared. What if you aren’t good enough? Isn’t it presumptuous to even send it there? What if you get rejected? What will people think?
But most of the really good things in life are terrifying.
Do what you need to do to calm down that fear.
- Get the opinion of a respected colleague. If someone has asked you to submit it to their special issue or edited collection, take that as confidence in the quality of your paper.
- Write down the worst case scenario, the realistic options, and the best case scenario.The most likely outcome is “revise and resubmit”. This is not a rejection.
- Remember that the review process is blind. Only the editor will know that your name goes with that paper and they see so many papers, they are unlikely to remember all the rejected ones.
Take a deep breath and send it off.
Good luck!
I have written more about impact and the fear associated with writing and publishing in my e-booklet Publish or Perish? You can read an excerpt here, and the whole thing is free if you sign up for the newsletter.
