Some thoughts about navigating impostor syndrome--something I struggle with on the daily--based on my recent experience becoming a journal editor. Friends: a thread on "scholar mindset" and "editor mindset."

I've been thinking about how I read books and articles in "scholar mindset." If I read something unfamiliar to me -- something I feel like I should have known already -- I get defensive and anxious. This is Bad, I know this, and yet it's a habit of mind that I struggle to escape.

Of course, this is WHY we read scholarship: to be exposed to new and unfamiliar ideas, to learn about sources we've overlooked, to broaden our understanding of our sub-discipline and our broader discipline. To, you know, GROW.

One common theme in "how to fix impostor syndrome" articles is to remember that it's normal to not know things. Of course every article will surprise me with new sources and ideas and analyses! That's their job! If those ideas were already obvious, the article wouldn't exist.

So why the knee-jerk anxious reaction? Why not simply acknowledge that it's okay that, as a mid-career scholar (am I mid-career now?), it's okay that I haven't already read and internalized every single thing?

I've been contrasting this with the wonderful experience of being editor of SMT-V. As an editor, it's not my job to know about things. It's my job to be interested in learning about things. This is what I'm calling "editor mindset."

I've been attending virtual conferences and watching papers, looking for ideas that seem exciting. I've been following compelling twitter threads and digging through old issues of journals looking for projects that might make cool videos.

When I encounter new projects--whether they're "in the wild" or actual submissions--I don't get anxious about what I don't know. I expect to not know things. I enjoy not knowing things!

When I need to find reviewers or evaluate arguments, I get to learn. I start tracing my way back through bibliographies, looking at conference programs, and literally asking around. Who's working on this? What's new out there? Who might help this author develop this argument?

This is, essentially, the same work that I'm doing in "scholar mindset," but I feel completely differently about it, because I'm in "editor mindset." But it strikes me that editor mindset is much closer to the curiosity that brought me into academia in the first place.

And editor mindset has the benefit of being (a) healthier and (b) much more fun than my anxiety-ridden scholar mindset.

For me, so much of impostor syndrome comes from the expectation that I am now The Expert on something, and if I encounter anything that challenges, stretches, or contradicts what I know and understand, that I am A Failure.

But of course, I know neither of these things are true: I am neither The Expert (because the world is complicated and we'll never get everything right), nor am I A Failure (because it's okay to not know something).

So my goal for 2021 is to (try to) embrace editor mindset in my academic work. To approach ideas that challenge me with a spirit of enthusiasm rather than anxiety. Don't get me wrong: this is going to be HARD.

But taking on an editorial role has reminded me of just how much fun doing scholarly work can be when you step back a bit.

Of course, I am in a state of incredible security; I have tenure, my job is not in jeopardy, I am not marginalized in my field or institution, and my research is relatively mainstream. There are genuine causes for anxiety that I no longer have to deal with, and I am very lucky.

But even so, I hope that, if you're reading this, the next time you feel that "impostor!" jolt (and we all do), try switching to editor mindset, just for a minute. It's nice over there.