How to make (journal) rejections easier?

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, Cara asks:

How to make rejections easier? After years in the game I still get a gut punch when I get a paper rejected. Does anyone have tips for reducing this in advance (I guess I mean actionable tips while the paper is under review, not longer term ones like get therapy and don't tie your self esteem to your work…).

I really empathize, but unfortunately have no real tips. Although rejections have gotten a bit easier for me over the years because I don't need them so much (as I did while on the market), they still sting a lot, and I don't know if that will ever go away. 

Do any readers have any helpful tips?

Comments

[Try to limit the trauma]

I have friends who send off each others' articles for journals (like they are in charge of hitting send and uploading to the journal etc and use their email address as the corresponding one, not as in they take credit for the others' articles) with a provided list of the order of journals to send them off to if they are rejected. A desk rejection or a rejection with no useful comments means the friend just goes down the list to the next journal. Because it uses the other person's email address, they don't have to receive or anticipate rejection emails. They can sort of presume if it has been a long time, the article has been rejected, but they don't have to viscerally confront it. If they get a R&R or substantive comments then they alert the other person who takes charge of their own article again.

[sorry that it is like this]

To minimize downtime, come up with a firm choice on the next place you'll submit it, and maybe even make the small edits that the next place might require in terms of formatting and so forth. Then you can have that paper right back out there as soon as the rejection hits your inbox.

[snarky]

This is a bit snarky, but one thing I do sometimes is count the number of mistakes (grammatical, conceptual, and philosophical) in my most scathing referee reports. I counted six or so in my harshest report.

[Michel]

It helps not to really desperately need them. And once you've had a few acceptances under your belt, it boosts your confidence in your own evaluation of a paper's quality, so that a few bad reports needn't seem like the end of the paper. But those aren't things you can actively do!

For my part, I usually read the verdict and the comments on different days. The separation helps. I also assume the paper will be rejected, which means (1) I don't invest much hope into it, and (2) I've already planned where to send it after the next several rejections. Sometimes I end up submitting elsewhere instead, but it helps to have a plan.

[try drinking]

One thing that helped me change my attitude toward rejections was to treat them as occasion for a bit of celebration. You can't get an acceptance if you don't send things out, and you can't send things out without inviting rejection. Even though it's disappointing, a rejection is a mark of progress.

I bought an expensive bottle of absinthe and only allowed myself a glass when I sent something out or when I got a rejection. That way, rejections came with a silver (or, rather, an opalescent green) lining. Going through that little ritual built in some time to reflect that rejection is an unavoidable part of professional progress.

(An acceptance grants permission to buy a new bottle, price be damned.)

[empathy]

OP says that they are "years in the game" suggesting moderate seniority. I want to say that I feel with you. I am also "years in the game" and I would say that the single most important variable here is how confident you are (and need to be). And it is super hard to build true confidence from little. I am sorry that I don't have super effective advice but I empathize. And I salute to your staying in the game despite that.

The reason I feel with you is not because I also feel a punch in the gut at rejection. Quite oppositely I feel absolutely nothing over rejection these years (even some warmth in the gut). *However*, I always feel a punch in the gut at "rejections" by any students. Even though I have a way longer history of teaching than publishing.

[kapto]

It helps to remember how little the rejection means. And one way to see that is to focus on some of the philosophers you most respect, and think about what they've undervalued or, more obvious, when they've been undervalued. I can't think of a single paper I revere that wasn't thought to be garbage, totally worthless, by someone equally venerable. Some of the most influential philosophy works -- Quine's Two Dogmas, Nagel's What is it Like, Scanlon's What we Owe -- were positively scorned, deemed garbage, by philosophers of comparable stature. Really!

[Hermias]

It hurts because you care, and that’s ok. The rough with the smooth.

If it’s a desk-reject: don’t feel anything. Could be that it wasn’t a fit, could be that the editor was in a bad mood. Doesn’t tell you anything about the paper.

If it’s a reject: read and reflect on the comments straight away. I used to let them linger in the inbox for a week or two, knowing it has failed but not knowing why. Half the time, there are good criticisms. Hurray, now you can improve your paper. Half the time, the criticisms are not good. Nevermind, pearls before swine… plenty more journals in the library.

[Tim]

For me, a large part of the "gut punch" of a rejection are the referee reports. Its very frustrating to get a paper rejected when its clear the reviewer(s) did such a poor job of reading the paper, knowing the literature, etc. So one thing I've done is, as soon as the paper is rejected, just automatically send it to the next journal that I've already picked in advance. Then, later, when I'm in a good mood or have more time I'll get around to reading the reports and changing the paper, if necessary, for the journal after the one its currently at.

[The system is broken]

Are you tenured? If so, stop sending papers to journals. End of rejections.

[Banana]

@kapto
Is be really interested in reading more about how those works were scorned at the time, could you point me to anything on this?