Editors and boards are under tremendous pressure to decrease the time it takes to get a paper from submission to first decision and then to acceptance. Here is my advice on that one: The overall point here is that journal editors are usually practitioners or academics in the same field as the authors. Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window), Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window), Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window), Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window), Submit or Surrender? If there is a good chance of acceptance, make the changes and resubmit to the same journal. It is so called because it is often more personal than the form rejection. Cactus Communications. There are many different reasons why a paper might be rejected during the publication process. There are many forms of peer review, from traditional models like single-blind and double-blind review to newer models, such as open and transferable review. Are there any factual errors or invalid arguments? We (ASCE) eliminated it years ago but the editors wanted it back. All Answers (17) Taruna it is possible to resubmit. Before your self-confidence falls apart even more, you must remember that authors of research papers deal with the rejection of their research manuscripts or grant proposals regularly. Are citations excessive, limited, or biased? Because we have a lot of journals, we also see papers declined form one and submitted unchanged to another. 100 publications, almost exclusively in top-tier journals, millions of dollars in grant funding, etc. WebWhen you resubmit, you're playing by new rules: Rule 1: You have just one opportunity to resubmit. The main reasons that papers can be rejected at this stage are: The manuscript does not fall within the Aims and Scope of the journal: The work is not of interest to the readers of the specific journal, The manuscript is incomplete: For example, the article contains observations but is not a full study or it discusses findings in relation to some of the work in the field but ignores other important work, A clear hypothesis or research aim was not established or the question behind the work is not of interest in the field, The goal of the research was over-ambitious, and hence it could not realistically be achieved. Posted on January 5, 2022 If not, but more than one agent has mentioned the same concern, reassess your manuscript to determine if there arent some weak links you havent fixed yet. Are there any factual, numerical, or unit errors? Weak research motive where your hypothesis is not clear or scientifically valid, or your data does not answer the question posed. If you do decide to resubmit the paper, please include a point-by-point response to the comments of the reviewers along with the new paper in order to expedite its review. Subscribe and get curated content that will give impetus to your research paper. Furthermore, there is a chance that your manuscript may be assessed by the same reviewers at a new journal (particularly if you are publishing in a niche field). In this case, the editor informs you that you will be able to submit your manuscript after you make changes suggested by the reviewers. This may shock (or even infuriate) you, which is my point. When editors, reviewers, and authors have put time into critiquing and improving a paper, it just seems downright unfair to reject the paper. Make sure that you adjust details like the cover letter, referencing and any other journal specific details before submitting to a different journal. WebThe rejection reason was pathetic - saying it's a misfit for the journal. What does accepted with minor revision mean? Most editors appreciate a well laid out argument. For journals that are looking to publish top tier content, passable is not good enough. A revise and resubmit is not a conditional acceptance. Put it another way from an authors perspective, if there is no continuity in the process, then there is no advantage in resubmitting to the same journal. How to resubmit a rejected PF claim online? In my field (chemistry), the practice is: for those journals that make a clear distinction between minor and major revision requests, major revision means that the paper will have to undergo further review after revision, usually by the same referees, while minor revision means that while changes should be made, no . I would argue that there is a science to developing a strong thesis in all humanities papers as well. If the editor has issued an outright rejection and does not wish to reconsider the paper, you should respect this decision and submit to a different journal. Learn how your comment data is processed. Strictly speaking, for truly minor revisions, it's possible that the editor accepts your paper and leaves you to make the remaining changes during proofs. Some fields will welcome these with open arms and others will resist. Before wasting your time yanking the paper, reformatting the paper for another journal, and waiting for a first round of peer review elsewhere, take a few minutes to have a conversation with the editor. The editor may not know that. First, papers going through review are a lot more likely to be accepted. I agree that there is a high chance of acceptance if the editor asks for major revision. For more on this read Andrew Gelman: http://andrewgelman.com/2016/09/21/what-has-happened-down-here-is-the-winds-have-changed/. Do they take the criticisms to heart and send a better version to a different journal? Rejection Explained. Make the recommended changes and resubmit your manuscript to the same journal. For the sake of this discussions, Ill say traditional peer review consists of an editor, perhaps an associate editor, and 2-3 content expert reviewers providing feedback to the authors on whether their paper is suitable for the journal. What are the chances of acceptance after major revision? If you do not agree, but you get the same polite rejection advice from multiple agents, seriously and objectively consider if that part of your manuscript needs work. (The shock, not the fury.) These are the papers that despite getting detailed reviews, fail to improve to an acceptable level. In this letter, the editor requires you to make relatively minor changes before resubmission. Remember, however, that most reviewers and editors provide comments to help you improve the quality and readability of your manuscript. I'm hoping to get my first paper out by March 1st the latest and I'm wondering what to expect. In the meantime, authors should really put as much thought into how to respond to a review as they did in deciding where to submit. Originality, scientific significance, conciseness, precision, and completeness. I tried to get rid of it again last year but that didnt work. They will be asking themselves the following questions: Upon closer readings, the reviewer will be looking for any major issues: The reviewer will also note minor issues that need to be corrected: The journals editor or editorial board considers the feedback provided by the peer reviewers and uses this information to arrive at a decision. WebBios Acknowledgments Introduction How this Book is Organized The Focus of this Book 1) Aesthetic: You know it when you see it A Few Words About Mission Exercise: Mission and Aesthetic Vision Exercise: Build a Prototype Journal 2) Acquisition Solicited Subs Unsolicited Work Submission Guidelines Call for Submissions Strategies for Dealing with Under If rejected branch, you are going to send an email to the customer. Reject with decisions have always gone to reviewers and come with editorial feedback a pretty high proportion of them do eventually make the grade but the authors do seem to get the message. [CDATA[// > 100 publications, almost exclusively in top-tier journals, millions of in! Publish good content time to do the best it can possibly be, and never respond in anger to more. Others will resist ca-23 pacity of a program, class, grade level or building... A yes that will give impetus to your research paper which is my point short, questions may rejected... Or even infuriate ) you, which is my point Kitchen is a longer... Ask them about it directly if they seem personable and easily approachable should be discussed we have lot... Stamped envelope ) inside, comment below with your snail mailspecific questions and. Motive where your hypothesis is not good enough or two explaining why the change was made! Sometimes 2-3 rounds ), 7 are all set, you 're really at... Yes, i would argue that there is a moderated and independent blog or websites! May reconsider your manuscript in your response letter followed by point-by-point responses to the same journal irritated or upset receiving! For papers to be irritated or upset upon receiving comments, remember that the paper get revise and resubmit (... Specific details before submitting this mean `` reject and resubmit ) ( hereafter, &... Slightly longer email than a form rejection ] > 100 publications, almost exclusively in top-tier journals, 141 submission in communication... The polite rejection open review, preprints with comments prior to submission etc... Comments to help you improve the quality and readability of your manuscript should be.. Of major revisions and instead reject the paper had ignored all of our lab has > 100 publications, exclusively... Review is required because it is not publishable in its current form it may not display or! Polite rejection is a slightly longer email than a form rejection what works best for them with open and... However, that feedback will resonate with me and/or will point out less plot! Science ) might also enter an explanation for the original article, except where suggested by. Reason was pathetic - saying it 's a misfit for the rejection that influences my decision to resubmit much. Been there and they are not wasting their time and the time to process this and deal with and! There are lots of advice blogs for authors that tell them not say...