Writers, Do You Have a Healthy Way to Overcome Rejection?

Learn to harness the power of cognitive science to handle rejection as a writer

Your trembling fingers fumble at the envelope flap. How long had I been waiting to hear back from them? You unfold the typed letter to reveal a corporate blazon.

Your heart sinks as you scan the salutation. We regret to inform you.

You glance at your watch. Was 10:15 AM too early for a drink?

Rejection Hurts

Whether it’s from a literary agent, an editor, or a writing contest, facing rejection is an inevitable (but always painful) part of the writing journey. To make things worse, I’m sure you’ve had to wash down that bitter pill of rejection with the vinegar of platitudes from well-meaning friends. How does one stay buoyant in the face of failure or rejection? First, let’s talk about the wrong ways to handle rejection.

Five Pessimistic Ways to Handle Rejection

When faced with rejection, many writers unknowingly fall into pessimistic patterns. Here are four common ways that writers often handle rejection poorly:

We dwell in self-doubt and negative self-talk, letting rejection define our worth as writers.
We engage in endless rumination, picking through all possible reasons and what-ifs about the rejection and replaying our failure in our minds.
We internalize the rejection as a personal failure, leading to feelings of inadequacy and fears of our identities as writers.
We compare ourselves to other successful writers, fueling envy and self-loathing.

But, there’s good news: there is a science-backed approach to help you navigate rejection and build resilience.

“This passivity [to aversive events] can be overcome by learning”
~ Steven Maier & Martin Seligman²

The Power of Our Explanatory Style

Summarizing decades of research in cognitive psychology into how humans deal with setback into his book “Learned Optimism”¹, renowned psychologist Martin Seligman sheds light on the importance of a concept called our “explanatory style”.

Explanatory style refers to the way we explain and interpret events to ourselves after they have happened. By recognizing and reshaping our explanatory style, we can reframe our rejection and maintain a positive outlook. There are three key dimensions of our explanatory style that impact how we handle such setbacks:

permanent vs. temporary
pervasive vs. specific
personal vs. external

Is it Permanent?

The permanence dimension reflects whether we perceive the cause of rejection as unchangeable and enduring. Examples of a permanent explanatory style include:

This rejection means I’ll never be a good writer.
This failure tells me that no matter how hard I work or how much effort I put into my writing, rejection follows me everywhere. It’s a never-ending cycle.
This outcome means I’m a terrible writer. My work always gets rejected, and it will never be good enough.

Is it Pervasive?

Pervasiveness refers to the extent to which we generalize one instance of rejection to an outcome that will happen in all similar situations. For example, if a rejection from one literary agent leads you to believe that all agents will reject your work, you’re adopting a pervasive explanatory style.

No one appreciates my style of writing. It doesn’t matter where I submit it.
It’s really unfair because the industry is just gamed against new writers. It’s the same everywhere.
This is yet another example of how it’s all about politics and money. That’s why they aren’t recognizing how good my writing is.

Is it Personal?

Personalization involves internalizing the cause of rejection as a reflection of our personal abilities or qualities. When you believe that a rejection means you lack talent as a writer, you’re subscribing to a personalized explanatory style.

This rejection letter confirms that I’m just not talented enough. I’m not cut out to be a writer.
I can’t believe they rejected my work again. It’s clear they have something against me personally. There must be something wrong with me.
No matter how hard I try, I always get rejected. It’s obvious that I’m just not meant to succeed.

“Success requires persistence, the ability to not give up in the face of failure. I believe that optimistic explanatory style is the key to persistence.”
~ Martin Seligman¹

Transforming Rejection with a Healthy Explanatory Style

To effectively deal with rejection, we need to shift our explanatory style from negative to positive. By converting each of the three categories mentioned above into their positive counterparts, we can foster resilience and maintain a healthy mindset. Here’s how:

Permanent → Temporary

Instead of viewing rejection as permanent, recognize that it is temporary and specific to a particular circumstance. Understand that a few (or a hundred) rejections do not define your writing career.

(bad) It’s pointless to keep trying. Rejection is inevitable, and there’s no chance of ever achieving my writing dreams.
(good) Rejections are a part of the writing journey for many authors. I won’t let this setback discourage me. I’ll view it as an opportunity to grow, refine my work, and find the right audience for my stories.
(good) Rejection is a temporary setback. I won’t let it deter me from pursuing my passion for writing. I’ll use each rejection as motivation to refine my craft, seek constructive feedback, and keep pushing forward.
(good) While this rejection is tough, I understand that my writing and I are a work-in-progress and I have room to grow and improve.

Pervasive → Specific

Avoid generalizing rejections to all aspects of your writing journey. Treat each rejection as a specific incident that does not dictate future outcomes.

(bad) No one appreciates my style of writing. It doesn’t matter where I submit it; I’ll always face rejection.
(good) While this particular rejection is disappointing, I know that it doesn’t mean all my writing will be universally rejected. I can learn from this by seeking feedback, making improvements, and finding opportunities where my work will be appreciated.
(good) This rejection doesn’t define my writing career. I understand that different publishers have different preferences and needs. I will keep exploring diverse avenues and submitting my work with confidence.
(good) I won’t let this rejection deter me. It’s just one person’s opinion, and there are plenty of other readers and editors out there. I’ll keep refining my craft, seeking constructive feedback, and finding the right audience for my writing.

Personal → External

Reframe rejections as external factors rather than personal flaws. Separate yourself from the rejection and see it as a detached event. Recognize that rejection often stems from subjective judgments, market trends, or a mismatch between your work and the recipient’s needs.

(bad) I can’t believe they rejected my work again. It’s clear they have something against me personally.
(good) While this rejection stings, I understand that the publishing industry is highly subjective. I will keep honing my skills and seeking opportunities where my writing can resonate with the right audience.
(good) While rejection can be discouraging, I’ll remind myself that the publishing industry is highly competitive and selective. I’ll stay resilient, research market trends, adapt my writing style, and pursue opportunities where my work can stand out in a crowded market.
(good) Rejection is a common part of the writing process. I’ll concede that this particular publication wasn’t the right fit and continue to submit my work to other publishers who may be a better fit and appreciate my style. How might I better analyze the style preferred by these other publishers?

“While you can’t control your experiences, you can control your explanations.”
~ Martin Seligman¹

Staying Buoyant is Hard Work

You’ll notice that the positive responses are longer and more nuanced than the negative responses. Positive explanatory styles tend to take more effort and mental energy — it is easier to roll downhill than to keep climbing to the summit. It’s all nice and good to have the theory, but what about practice?

Remember, if you’ve spent decades reinforcing a poor explanatory style, it might take some time to turn your ship around

When that dreaded email chimes into your inbox, here are some concrete steps you can take:

Pen out your explanatory narrative. In one or two sentences, describe the reason why you think this rejection occurred. Why do this? When you keep negative thoughts swirling in your brain, it consumes an enormous amount of energy to process it because it is difficult to differentiate the “it” (the thoughts and feelings) from the “me” (you are more than your current thoughts and feelings). When out there on paper, the thoughts and feelings are now external. Out there, they become easier to compare to the unhealthy and healthy explanatory narratives I’ve detailed above.
Take a mental and physical break. Rejection hits not just the heart but the body as well — let your brain and body know that. Go for a walk. Play with your cat. Throw a twenty-two minute pity party and then wrap it up. I often take the day off.
Examine how healthy your narratives are. Since you’ve captured them on paper, take some time to sniff at them to detect traces of Permanence, Pervasiveness or Personalization. Poke at them. Take them apart. Most importantly, stay in the investigatory mode — don’t shortcut into self-condemning platitudes or band aid solutions like “I should (horrid word!) be more positive about this” or false hope like “next time will be my bestseller”.
Rewrite the narrative. Choose from one of the above healthy statements or adapt your own. Try it on for size for a day or two and see if it helps you stay afloat — if not, try another one. Telling the new narrative to others has a strange effect of making it sink in.
Focus on small steps you can take. The healthy examples above are peppered with things like “research market trends”, “adapt my style” and “seek constructive feedback”. Focus on what you can change about your behavior and you’ll find the ship slowly starting to turn.

Remember, if you’ve spent decades reinforcing a poor explanatory style, it might take some time to turn your ship around. But any small change you can enact is a good sign. Focus on trajectory and the outcome will follow.

Stay Afloat, Dear Writers

As aspiring writers, rejection is an inevitable part of our path. By harnessing the power of cognitive science and making small adjustments to our explanatory style, we can beat back the lurking specter of self-doubt. Remember, it’s not the rejection itself that determines our success, but rather how we respond to it. Embrace the journey, learn from each experience, and keep writing. Your words have the power to inspire, connect, and change lives.

Next time you open that email, why not try taking a deep breath and reminding yourself that rejections are but temporary, specific, and external?

What explanatory styles or narratives have you found to work or not work? Share it in the comments and encourage other readers!

References

Seligman, Martin E. P. Learned Optimism: How to Change Your Mind and Your Life. Reprint edition. New York: Vintage, 2006.
Maier, Steven F., and Martin E. P. Seligman. “Learned Helplessness at Fifty: Insights from Neuroscience.” Psychological Review 123, no. 4 (July 2016): 349–67.
Note that some sentences and examples of explanatory styles were drafted (in my first draft only) with help from OpenAI’s ChatGPT 3.5.

Writers, Do You Have a Healthy Way to Overcome Rejection? was originally published in The Writing Cooperative on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Go to Source
Author: ScientistWhoStayed