Qualitative Research, Word Counts, and Publishing Woes

As I stare at the finish line for tenure and promotion to Associate Professor, I take my colleagues' and peers' constructive feedback for me and my work seriously. As I listen to them and consider my next steps, one of my many growing frustrations with academic publishing (I have so many, I promise I’ll discuss academic publishing fees another time) relates to journal structure and restrictions. You see, I’m a qualitative researcher by both training and inherent interest, so the research questions I most often propose center on human experiences. I almost always want to know what the people behind the numerical data we present say about their experiences, but in their own words.

One of the pieces of feedback I received from a colleague to improve my dossier was to (re)consider the diversity of the journals where I publish my scholarship. Though I rolled my eyes at the idea of this even being a thing when I already choose top-tier and high-quality journals as is, the truth of the matter is my work is predominantly in the same sect of journals for concrete reasons. I have made some intentional decisions about where I will publish because (1) they accept and publish qualitative research with fewer than 100,000 participants *eye roll*; (2) they have been receptive to my research and current lines of inquiry; and (3) they tend to have more word count space.

In my quest to diversify my journal submissions, I’ve grown utterly exhausted with how many journals have low word counts and page limits, despite only publishing online and no longer offering print copies. In theory, I could understand why journals would want such limits back when they had to go to print. In practice, I’m frustrated because this means there are fewer journals where I can submit my work, not only because it is qualitative in nature, but because there seems to be growing inconsistencies between field/reviewer expectations and journal norms.

So what do I mean? On the one hand, reviewers keep asking for: more robust positionality statements (we should), example interview questions (cool), longer participant quotes (fair), more literature review and citations of very specific people (fine), and even more discussion of the paper at hand (gahhhhh).

Yeesh.

While this feedback is easy for me because it asks for everything I like most about qualitative research, at the same time, I feel professionally stuck. While I want to meet these reviewers’ (and increasingly the field’s) expectations of what *good qualitative research looks like,* I’m also up against journals and editors with rules and expectations I feel I cannot make. And this is particularly true for space limits on research.

Two of my favorite journals to read and cite, which I have not published in since completing my Ph.D., are the Journal of College Student Development and the Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice. I’ve wondered if I will ever have a chance to publish in either journal because of the depth with which I approach my qualitative scholarship and how I present my findings, which seems inconsistent with their expectations. JSARP, for instance, has a word count of “7,000 words maximum (inclusive of references, cover page, tables, appendices, and all materials).” And JCSD says, “Feature Articles should not exceed 30 pages total, including references, tables, and figures.”

Oof.

To be clear, because we seem to forget how nuance can exist on the internet, I’m not saying that the people who do publish qual work in those journals aren’t doing their work how or even better than I do my work. However, I am saying that despite how much people tell me I’m academically successful, I cannot quite figure out how to send my work to two journals that I love. I’ve been working on one such paper for the last few months that I’ve cut and cut and cut. I finally opted to include only two or three representative quotes per theme to get the word count down, and the piece’s findings alone are still 3200 words. I’ve cut and added, then added and cut, then recut and re-added to the literature review because I want to ensure what I’m sharing best aligns with the quotes for effective discussion.

And do you know what has happened? Instead of getting this and a couple of other papers out and under review over the last few months, I now have 4 papers that are somewhere between 80 to 98% done that are sitting — stuck — because I can’t figure out how to get the word limits down. People often recommend hiring professional editors, but the truth of the matter is I simply don’t have the financial resources to pay a professional editor to help me do it. In fact, one of my good friends, Eliana, once read one of my papers to help me discern what to cut. Do you know what she came back and said? She was effectively ready to go through and slice, but so much of the manuscript was already tight.

ALREADY TIGHT?!

Do you know where I haven’t had this problem? In my quantitative research and in projects and journals with significantly higher word count limits. So, FML… As the kids say. And while I don’t really have an answer for this issues, I do have an ask: As more and more new generations of faculty take the reigns at journals, I hope that we all will consider ways to be more supportive of deep qualitative scholarship. I hope that at some point, we can even move away from the idea of word limits altogether and instead focus on the quality and necessity of what’s on each of the pages of each individual article. There is some deep, quality work that we sometimes miss because of our rigid boundaries around what an academic article is or what it’s supposed to look like. Isn’t it time we ask ourselves WHY?

I know that what I’m asking for will impact the reviewing process. I’m also asking this as someone who reviews multiple journal articles multiple times per month because I am committed to being part of the change I wish to see. And I don’t submit trash reviews — ask JDHE, JFGSS, and JWG. I take my time and really focus on being supportive and developmental. And, I think it’s time for a change.

Perhaps in the short term, that change is in my *own* process of learning how to cut (if anyone wants to volunteer to help… say so please). But in the long run, I think a bigger-than-me philosophical conversation is necessary. And one last thing while we’re at it on qualitative research — can we be done with the idea that you need a bunch of participants to obtain rich data? I might be able to tell you more about six people from one study than a research team might be able to tell you about a study with 60 people.

Rather than focusing on quantity, we should prioritize quality in qualitative work–after all, they share the exact root word for a reason.

But maybe I was raised wrong @/UGA Qual? :-)