How the Monster Jury helped me deal with peer review better — R Voice

How the Monster Jury helped me deal with peer review better

This discussion has a more recent version.
Jayashree Rajagopalan
Jayashree Rajagopalan Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 225 admin
edited October 29 in Personal Stories

Photo by Yan Krukov from Pexels

Note: This story has been shared by Jusso Nieminen, Project Researcher at the University of Finland. It was first published on September 25, 2020, on Editage Insights.

If I were asked to think about the most emotional peer review process in my life, I would surely reimagine in front of me those three reviewers that I still call The Monster Jury. Months before meeting up with the Jury, I had produced a wonderful research article with my brilliant team. The article drew on a multidisciplinary approach, our data was rich, and our complex analyses offered a real contribution to our field. As I pressed the ‘submit’ button, I could have not felt more proud. 

Five months later, I heard my email notification: Ping! The reviews were in! 

I must admit that as a young academic, receiving a decision from a journal stirs up some strong emotions. With trembling hands I read the editor’s decision: Major revisions! Not a rejection, yay! But as I kept reading the reviewer comments, my initial joy soon turned into disappointment. 

Jury 1 had completely misunderstood our major points - but I instantly realized why; we had not structured our arguments cohesively. Jury 1 was not to blame for that. Jury 2, on the other hand, was not pleased with our approach. Instead, Jury 2 let us know that our theoretical framework was insufficient, our data collection procedure flawed, and our analysis lacked scientific rigor. Finally, Jury 3 pointed out so many substantial flaws in our very approach that I instantly closed the email. And shut down my computer. 

The worst part about the comments by The Monster Jury was not that I had to deal with a variety of emotions in order to process the comments. No, these comments seemed to address my deepest core as a researcher. They pointed out flaws in my identity as an educational researcher. I felt that the Jury had not rejected my article but had certainly rejected my identity as a certain kind of a researcher! This was a deep blow for me. 

During the next month, I did my best to avoid working on the comments. I had fun with my friends, started new writing projects, travelled to the other side of the world, and thought about leaving academia. You know, the things you do when you are faced with a really uncomfortable situation…I did all of that. 

But as the deadline approached, I finally had to sit down and start working on the revision. How did I manage? One day I hardened my heart and opened my computer. I started working like a robot. By dividing the comments into smaller bits, I completed one technical task after another. My mental state and approach at this time was the same one I have while I’m jogging: Just keep on running, do not think about it; let another Lady Gaga song play in the background. Don’t stop! 

The main takeaway of this process was that receiving feedback and acting upon it required me to not only to handle my emotions but to handle my identity as a researcher. I had to use a critical approach through which I did not just let any comment become a part of or influence my unique identity; rather, I remembered that the comments by the Jury concerned my work. This approach has helped me a lot since then. These days I actively take the notion of identity into account while acting upon reviewer comments!


  • Yufita Chinta
    Yufita Chinta Member Posts: 126 ✭✭✭✭

    ow ow ow, @Jayashree Rajagopalan Thank you for putting this published article here. When I read the title: "monster jury", I don't know why but I imagine a cute monster in the 'Fantastic beast' movie 😋

    The story is resonated with me. I do the same: celebrating for getting revision, reading the comments and getting mixed feelings and emotions, closing the PC, and then coming back to the comments after awhile.

    Hey, I find that it is normal to have the mixed feelings and emotions. Normal as same as the 'ouch!' with immediately get away from a hot pan. But, I try to have a positive thinking by sounding to myself "the reviewers are supporting me". In exceptional issues, when I find unhealthy attitudes or comments from the reviewers, my 'ouch!' will be 'what's wrong with you?' 😅 So, I need help of the editor then.

    I love the last paragraph that the author bravely shared about putting down the self-prestige. That is the 'positivity'.

  • chris leonard
    chris leonard Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 145 admin

    Yufita - the Monster Jury is waiting for you!

  • Yufita Chinta
    Yufita Chinta Member Posts: 126 ✭✭✭✭

    Receiving those cute monsters safely landing on my desk, @chris leonard 😅