Most editors send statements such as: PLEASE NOTE THAT RESUBMITTING YOUR MANUSCRIPT DOES NOT GUARANTEE EVENTUAL ACCEPTANCE when they return decisions letters to authors. I want to know if such statements pose any threat to an author's ability to resubmit the article to the journal? Can this encourage or discourage one from revising and resubmitting a manuscript when you are not sure it will be accepted? Is there any way such statements could be made better?
It depends really on the reviewers' feedback. If they give you constructive comments you have to decide whether it is worth your time undertaking that work and addressing their concerns and then re-submitting. You can't expect them to guarantee you acceptance of a re-submitted article before it is reviewed again!!
Editors' and reviewers' feedback can sometimes be terribly discouraging. I was once more or less told that no amount of revision would result in my paper being published. On reflection, that might have been true, but it is poor editorial practice to be so deliberately discouraging to a (then) young scholar. But equally, authors can submit rubbish, and they need to be advised in no uncertain terms where they have to lift their game. Most editors and reviewers, in my experience, do this, and do it fairly and dispassionately. Occasionally a reviewer hides behinds the cloak of anonymity and dispenses poorly-worded feedback, and (rarely) insults. But -- for better or worse -- that's the nature of the peer-review publication process.
Thanks Yurgos and Martin for your answers. I will wait for more comments
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Philology
- Classical Philology
- Manuscripts