Tips for overcoming lack of confidence in research?

[permanent imposter]

I have a general issue with low self-esteem and lack of confidence (hence my username). I am working on this. By some miracle I managed to graduate and find a TT job, all while feeling like I was not particularly contributing to my field (humanities). I've published articles and book chapters here and there but none of them have received much notice.

Anyway, I have felt stagnated in recent years, partly due to the demands of my job, but also partly because my field seems to be attracting a lot of newcomers with interesting things to say, all who seem to be publishing more quickly than me.

I want to work on putting out a monograph, but I'm at the point where reading others' work really demotivates me because I feel like they're saying the things I want to say, and saying it better. I know this is a silly feeling, and if I were advising a student I'd tell them that publishing in the humanities is not about being first to some "scoop" but about having a conversation with scholars in your field. But when it comes to my own work, I feel stuck. In the past couple of years, I've even avoided reading work that's been published in my field, and avoided conversations at conferences, which I know is self-sabotaging. I want to change my behavior and wade into the fray. Any advice? Has anyone struggled with something like this in the past? How did you deal with it?

[mamselle]

if I were advising a student I'd tell them that publishing in the humanities is not about being first to some "scoop" but about having a conversation with scholars in your field.

I appreciate the message you just shared, I have to remind myself of this often, having worked as an admin in the sciences, where the opposite is true.

I've been thinking a lot about "compression" as a parallel to what happens to salaries, in publications. Several projects I've worked on over time have needed complete revamping campaigns for their lit. review and conclusions sections--some just to catch up, some because I disagree strongly with something that's recently appeared...the "if ONLY I'd been able to publish my side of the conversation sooner, this wouldn't have happened," kind of thing....there are a couple of pending issues, building up a head of steam, that I disproved awhile back but got rejections for unrelated reasons and couldn't immediately remedy them or re-submit elsewhere, since the fields I work in are small and alternative journals are fewer and fewer.

And then there are the new-kid-on-the-block pubs, which think they've re-invented the wheel, and they haven't....just ran into one of those in a conference paper last week. It makes more work for someone trying to just get something out, to have to stop and re-explain why that's not going to work in the context of a piece that would have headed it off at the pass if it had been out already (well, my hubris suggests that's the case...)

We have differing problems, though, in that, while I may take too long by being careful and checking details a lot (which can, I know, also be an "imposter-ish" reaction formation, fearing to be wrong) at least--not envy here, just facts--you have a position that not only supports but encourages and even may REQUIRE you to publish (you didn't say whether this is expected for tenure where you are, or not).

All my chutzpah has to come from my own stubborn beliefs in this work as a vocation and something I'm supposed to do....which gets me fairly far, but can also become evanescent when a paying job arises for which I have to stop my real work and fix their problems, or when the tangle of notes, ideas, and time pressures build up and I'd just rather watch otter videos or Graham Norton.

One thing one of my advisors told me was, "If it's your true work, you'll never make a serious mistake in it."

So, for what that's worth--it's encouraged me at times--that's one way to see it.

M.

[Morden]

By some miracle I managed to graduate and find a TT job, all while feeling like I was not particularly contributing to my field (humanities). I've published articles and book chapters here and there but none of them have received much notice.

Hi. I'm also in the humanities and so I understand feeling like it's a miracle to graduate and find a TT job. But the reason it's a miracle isn't that you're not worthy; it's that there are so many really interesting, intelligent and hardworking graduates. You're one of them. The reality in most humanities fields (unlike sciences or social sciences) is that we don't often cite each other; those citation metrics don't work well for us, as I'm sure you know.

In the past couple of years, I've even avoided reading work that's been published in my field, and avoided conversations at conferences, which I know is self-sabotaging. I want to change my behavior and wade into the fray. Any advice? Has anyone struggled with something like this in the past? How did you deal with it?

After graduating and getting a miraculous tenure-track job, I struggled to keep my research going with all the other pressures of a tenure-track job; newer graduates seemed to be much more productive (and probably were because of all the time commitments of a tenure-track and then tenured job). I lost interest in my dissertation topic, and then gradually the larger area I worked in. I felt more and more isolated (and judged) at conferences. It was burnout and depression.

Three things that helped: 1) getting medical help; 2) going to the same conference multiple years in a row, so that I could start to build relationships with people (volunteering on a society's board or conference's organizing committee is another way to achieve this); 3) finding a way to rejuvenate my interest in scholarship. For me, that meant shifting focus from the primary texts of my discipline to how my students encounter those primary texts, but in part that's because I'm at a very teaching-focused institution.

[Hegemony]

I've published articles and book chapters here and there but none of them have received much notice.

I wonder if you have a misunderstanding of how articles and book chapters work. None of them do seem to "receive much notice," no matter what. I mean you publish them and nobody mentions them — presumably some folks read them, but they don't write to you or post about it anywhere or anything. Very occasionally one might write to you, but I think it's happened to me maybe once in my entire career. Sometimes journals have a counter where you can see how many people have downloaded the article. (When you hit ten downloads, break open the champagne.) People will use if for their own research, but very slowly. They start a project, they find your article, they write the project for years and years, they submit it somewhere, they're asked for revisions, they do the revisions slowly, they resubmit, finally it gets put into print — it can easily be five years minimum after your own article comes out. In twenty years you'll be able to see a body of scholars using your work. Right now it will be invisible.

The best way to get that sense of excited feedback is to present at an in-person conference, but obviously the times are not good for these.

But you can just recognize that, as the saying is, "Feelings aren't facts." You can tell this by all the incredibly mediocre and tedious academics — you've seen them in operation — who are supremely confident that their work is the best thing ever to hit the intellectual world. People often come pre-installed with a certain amount of confidence, and it's not correlated to the actual worth of their work. What does that mean? That your worries about whether your work is good enough don't correlate with reality. If it's published, someone found it worthwhile. Just accept that. There's no downside to accepting it.  And eventually you will find someone working in your field who makes a lot of simple errors and miscitations and blunders. You'll think, "Wait a minute, that person has gone off the rails here." And how do you know that? Because you do know stuff. You are a good scholar. Relish that fact!

[Hibush]

This description sounds like a relatively common form of burnout. The positive is that the scholarly excitement can be rekindled.

One thread to the story that I can relate to, is that it is hard to reengage in the scholarly conversation when one sees others doing such cool things. That's not particular to the humanities at all. It is a natural phenomenon after taking on the other responsibilities of a faculty positions while younger scholars get to spend all their time thinking up new stuff and thinking through hard questions.

There is only one way I know of to get back in the game, and that is to get back in the game. In my opinion, a lot of publishing in the humanities is not a conversation with other scholars; it is a bunch of monologues to an empty house. That has to be dispiriting. I've published a few papers in science that got no meaningful citations. That feels horrible. Nobody actually cares about my great idea.

The conversation that stimulates your thinking is the cure. What medium does that best. It won't be a monograph, so you have to find something less conventional. It won't be a conference where speakers read from prepared texts. That also is not a conversation. My best stimulus is the grant proposal done together with a couple of other scientists who have complementary skills. We pool and critique our best ideas, and the reward for success is funding to find the answer. You may have opportunities with some characteristics in common.

Think about that conversation. It should be one where participants say "that's an interesting idea, it would mean that..." and similar engaged positive feedback.  How often, what medium (start a new subreddit?), with whom?

[glendower]

"The answer is to remember that the exercise of the human intelligence is the greatest thing ever. Work that employs and expands the human intelligence can never be without value." https://prosedoctor.blogspot.com/2011/07/next-steps-to-happiness-believe-that.html

[permanent imposter]

Hello all, thank you for your comments and support.

We have differing problems, though, in that, while I may take too long by being careful and checking details a lot (which can, I know, also be an "imposter-ish" reaction formation, fearing to be wrong) at least--not envy here, just facts--you have a position that not only supports but encourages and even may REQUIRE you to publish (you didn't say whether this is expected for tenure where you are, or not).

I definitely have the same issue -- I tend to go down the bibliographic rabbit hole and want to make sure that if I talk about Issue X, I include an acknowledgment to all the scholars who have ever mentioned Issue X in some way. I think this is definitely related to my imposter syndrome.

I am at a teaching-intensive uni which means the publishing requirements are not that high, which means they "support" our research by funding conferences, etc., but never give us enough time to do it. I am trying to motivate myself to put more time into it, at least in the summer.

The belief/vocation part is tricky -- it's hard to discern when I should believe in my work when I am so dependent on external validation. Again, working on it...

After graduating and getting a miraculous tenure-track job, I struggled to keep my research going with all the other pressures of a tenure-track job; newer graduates seemed to be much more productive (and probably were because of all the time commitments of a tenure-track and then tenured job). I lost interest in my dissertation topic, and then gradually the larger area I worked in. I felt more and more isolated (and judged) at conferences. It was burnout and depression.

Three things that helped: 1) getting medical help; 2) going to the same conference multiple years in a row, so that I could start to build relationships with people (volunteering on a society's board or conference's organizing committee is another way to achieve this); 3) finding a way to rejuvenate my interest in scholarship. For me, that meant shifting focus from the primary texts of my discipline to how my students encounter those primary texts, but in part that's because I'm at a very teaching-focused institution.

Yes, that first paragraph accurately describes my trajectory as well, especially the last part. Friends from grad school would excitedly invite me to form a panel for a "hot" conference and I would reject the invitation, thinking, "Why do you find this fun?" Many academics talk with excitement about returning to "their" annual conference, which was something I found incredibly incomprehensible. I was happy when COVID delayed my conferences or made them virtual.

I guess I just haven't found mine yet, and that's good advice about going to the same one multiple years in a row.

Can you elaborate on how you shifted your scholarship focus? That is something I have been thinking about as well. I find the in-classroom discussions so much fun and I love debating texts with my students. Are you talking about publishing textbooks/instructional anthologies?

I wonder if you have a misunderstanding of how articles and book chapters work [...] In twenty years you'll be able to see a body of scholars using your work. Right now it will be invisible.

Yeah, poor wording on my part but I was talking about the citations. I find myself envying the people who seem to be cited all the time, because they "got to" this relatively newer field before I did, and it seems to create a snowball effect where these citations enhance their reputation and they get published more easily. I guess I just have to wait twenty years :)

I wanted to thank you for everything you wrote above, and also your comments in the mental health thread which have always been helpful/uplifting for me.

The conversation that stimulates your thinking is the cure. What medium does that best. It won't be a monograph, so you have to find something less conventional. It won't be a conference where speakers read from prepared texts. That also is not a conversation. My best stimulus is the grant proposal done together with a couple of other scientists who have complementary skills. We pool and critique our best ideas, and the reward for success is funding to find the answer. You may have opportunities with some characteristics in common.

Yes, for that reason I'm going to keep an eye out for writing groups. Colleagues have recommended a couple of organizations to me, but they cost a lot of money. Has anyone had success finding groups like these on Reddit? I occasionally see posts looking for partners but I don't follow Reddit that closely.

"The answer is to remember that the exercise of the human intelligence is the greatest thing ever. Work that employs and expands the human intelligence can never be without value." https://prosedoctor.blogspot.com/2011/07/next-steps-to-happiness-believe-that.html

Thanks for sharing, and I really like that blog overall.

[mamselle]

Has anyone had success finding groups like these on Reddit? I occasionally see posts looking for partners

I don't tend to collaborate much on my writing, but for other things, I tend to sniff out those whose courses look interesting or whose papers were good at the conferences I go to (I do have several that feel like mine, for which I'm very grateful), and build the group I want myself.

Adding oneself into already-formed groups seems trickier to me; if you form the group you get to lay the ground rules and be the yeast in the dough.

M.

[Morden]

Can you elaborate on how you shifted your scholarship focus? That is something I have been thinking about as well. I find the in-classroom discussions so much fun and I love debating texts with my students. Are you talking about publishing textbooks/instructional anthologies?

I became interested in the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL). So instead of researching X, I research things like how students tend to approach X, how to develop disciplinary thinking around X, etc. Mostly I write articles, though I have written one book (aimed at educators) and edited one. I am working on another one now.

The switch to SoTL made sense for me because I am heavily invested in my teaching and want to learn more about how to do it. Some institutions look down on SoTL, but thankfully mine doesn't. I still read disciplinary scholarship to prepare for my teaching, but my scholarly contribution is elsewhere now.

[Hegemony]

I think that rather than look for the perfect set-up that allows you to collaborate or meet with great encouraging people and all, or any of that, you should just find the most interesting project you and get started. (I am assuming you are in a field where it's usual to do individual rather than group projects.) You can spin your wheels a long time looking for the right collaborators, and then even when you find collaborators, a lot of them are flaky or overscheduled and won't get going very fast, and you will be held back. Just find a topic that makes you think "It would be fun to know more about that!" And then embark on doing so.

[glendower]

This Prose Doctor post is also a good one: https://prosedoctor.blogspot.com/2020/07/starving-inner-critic.html

[mamselle]

Two other off-hand thoughts:

1. In some cases, especially in the humanities, a collaborative work isn't valed as highly and is certainly not the general expectation as it is in the sciences. So, to avoid problems later, if a piece of work is being considered as part of a  T&/or P effort it may be important to find out how that field and that school and that department see those issues.

2. Reflecting on the thread title, I actually find the humility of those who are less self-assured to make me more likely to trust their work than those who are TOO self-assured.

Carelessness and sloppy thinking can lead to poor work in those who don't see the need for double-checking something, or who figure what they think they know is true "because everyone knows that" or because it leads to a glitzy result.

M.

[Vid]

Growing up as a kid, we used to do a lot of  (maybe) strange things!! For example, my mom (a well-educated woman) used to tell me (and my other siblings) to go and look in the mirror, hug yourself and say "Vid" I LOVE you, I really really LOVE you. We had to do this first thing in the morning and the last thing before going to bed every single day! I didn't understand at that time what my mom really meant by this but now I understood she wanted to teach us the power of self-love and self-esteem!

I still do this:-) and so do my kids! Do my mom' secret affirmation! It works!  

[AvidReader]

Friends from grad school would excitedly invite me to form a panel for a "hot" conference and I would reject the invitation, thinking, "Why do you find this fun?" Many academics talk with excitement about returning to "their" annual conference, which was something I found incredibly incomprehensible. I was happy when COVID delayed my conferences or made them virtual.

I guess I just haven't found mine yet, and that's good advice about going to the same one multiple years in a row.

YMMV, but I really prefer small conferences. Even in my subfield, the major conferences regularly have over 1000 attendees. I attended some small ones in 2019 with 20-40 attendees (and the added bonus of being cheaper) and was able to connect with people much more easily. One in particular led to multiple new friendships, two invited lectures, a productive professional collaboration, and a journal article. I was impressed by the participants' treatment of graduate students and recent grads, and I look forward to seeing those people again.

AR.

[Ruralguy]

I don't think I could stand such an affirmation. Perhaps i just don't love myself enough, or my kid, who I would never suggest do such a thing.