Some editors keep a paper for long time, more than 6 months or a year, without a decision and when send them a reminder message they do not reply or sometimes reply for the first time saying that the paper still under the review process, then do not reply again for long time. So I ask how a paper takes long time like that for the review process and usually the editors when they invite a reviewer, they ask him to finish the review process within 3 weeks. What the best way to resolve a problem like that, withdraw the paper or just submit to another journal?. The editors in meetings always talk about unethical behavior of authors and never talk about their unethical behavior on authors and during the publication process.
Hi, Ahmed,
How long one should wait on an editor's decision depends on a variety of factors - your stature within your profession, the quality of the journal to which you submitted the manuscript, and the exigencies of your impending application for promotion and/or tenure.
As a doctoral student, I waited 10 months one time for review notes on a manuscript. The required revisions were extensive and took me four months to respond. By that time another editor was in charge of the journal who sent it out for a statistical review. From first submission to publication was nearly 3 full years, but it did not affect my career adversely. The tenure clock had not started and the quality of the journal helped me get my current position.
That same journal has recently taken 19 and 24 months from first submission to publication on two other manuscripts. I've learned to be patient when hoping for acceptance and publication in a well-respected journal.
The trick is to keep writing. Hit submit, take a day to relax, then begin the next manuscript. (You should always be contemporaneously planning one project, collecting data on a second, and writing up the results on a third). Keep feeding submissions and let the publications take care of themselves. Fretting over long wait periods is just part of the job - or so it seems to me.
Hi, Ahmed,
How long one should wait on an editor's decision depends on a variety of factors - your stature within your profession, the quality of the journal to which you submitted the manuscript, and the exigencies of your impending application for promotion and/or tenure.
As a doctoral student, I waited 10 months one time for review notes on a manuscript. The required revisions were extensive and took me four months to respond. By that time another editor was in charge of the journal who sent it out for a statistical review. From first submission to publication was nearly 3 full years, but it did not affect my career adversely. The tenure clock had not started and the quality of the journal helped me get my current position.
That same journal has recently taken 19 and 24 months from first submission to publication on two other manuscripts. I've learned to be patient when hoping for acceptance and publication in a well-respected journal.
The trick is to keep writing. Hit submit, take a day to relax, then begin the next manuscript. (You should always be contemporaneously planning one project, collecting data on a second, and writing up the results on a third). Keep feeding submissions and let the publications take care of themselves. Fretting over long wait periods is just part of the job - or so it seems to me.
Dear Ahmed S. M. Saleh,
I have also faced such types of problems. I have submitted a manuscript in a reputed journal and up to five month the system showed "with editor". After first remind the journal management did not replied. Then i decide to second reminder. After few days of second reminder -- the editorial board reject my manuscript mentioning "Your manuscript does not match with the scope of our Journal". I am just thundered!!!!!! The manuscript does not match with the Journal, it comes after nearly six month with two reminder????
I just shocked. Does not have any systems or solutions or is not it violence of editorial ethical behavior????
Thanks Mr Ahmed to discuss such types of problems in this platform so that numerous researcher can learn more insight from this chapter.
Don't wait too long. Your script could be better than the image of the journal.
I think it is variable according to different journals policies. Most respectable journals have a definite map designed since submission, first editoroial decision, review time, last editorial decision, Editing and publication. and if it is not clarified on the journal home page you have to ask about after submission. Instead, you can have a look on previously published articles in that journal and notice the date of submission and date of acceptance or publication.
In my view, you could withdraw the paper and send it to another journal. Best
Hi Ahmed,
About three-four months to check for an update on the paper. Just gently asking when could you expect the review?
All the best, Usha
I like Peter Kindle's suggestion. I see the editorial process like a pipeline. I keep putting texts in one end and they eventually come out the other as publications. Some pieces go through fast, others slow, but there is usually a steady stream of publications. This reduces stress and lets me avoid overly fixating on this aspect of academic work.
Once I tracked down all the papers that had gotten stuck in the pipeline, inquired about their status, and sent most of them elsewhere; this resulted in a brief flood of new publications.
(The slowest editors, in my experience, tend to be the ones responsible for proceedings volumes; some colleagues have opted for not handing their papers over to the organizers so they can submit them to journals of their own choice.)
The time a manuscript takes after it is submitted to a journal to the decision depends upon various factors. First is the reputation of the journal. If its a very good journal (SCI/E) then the paper is quickly assigned to the editor. Now the fate of the manuscript starts. If the editor is active then it won't take much time for your paper to be desk rejected or to be send to the reviewers. If it is send to the reviewers then comes the factor how many minimum reviews the journal requires for decision to be made. Generally, it is 2 or 3. Whatever be the number if the editor have requested say 5 or 6 reviewers then there is a possibility of getting the minimum reviews in time. Some journals request only the minimum reviewers and wait for all them to submit the reviews. This causes a delay in the manuscript decision. Other factor is how much time the journal gives to the reviewers. In Elsevier it is generally 21 or 28 days. So, before sending a paper to any journal look at its website. They generally mention the average time for the first decision. Also, see some of the latest accepted manuscript in that journal and look their publication timeline. This will help you to choose a journal.
It depend largely on reviewers and editor. Some time editor delay the process due to his business in some other works and some time reviewers do not submit their reports on time.
First, you should follow the status of your submitted manuscript. Based on the Journal/publisher and reviewer's comment and Editor's presence, it is decided how much time it will take for review. At least wait for 3 months, then you can send a reminder mail to the editor-in-chief in a polite.
Dear Ahmed,
It is suggested to submit the paper to good journals which usually provide the first decision within couple of months. It is easy to check the journal behavior and how long it takes for the review processes.
Regards
After receiving reviewers' comments, I usually do the decision within 2 days. Reminder letters from authors should be replied within a week. These are my experiences and practice. But, as an author, I have to wait much longer in many cases.
I`m in this situation right now , I think you should wait if you think that your paper matches the journal` scope
You have to wait. depending on the quality of the journal and the promptness of the editor, it might take a while before your work may move from the editors desk.
From my point of view, one month is enough for the first decision, 2-3 months are OK for the review process, then one month for the final decision after revision. More than that you may email him gently.
I think you have mentioned the final conclusion ... The unethical behavior of editors during the publication process .... That's it!
This discussion should reach to the editor of the journals. Some times a year passes and there is no reply from journal even after reminder.
In general, when we communicate the manuscript for publication, Editorial board forwarded to reviewers ( mostly 3 ) , Review the manuscript is a big task and take enough time. For reviewers this work is free of cast. Any how editorial board receive the manuscript with minor or major comments. Editorial board communicate to author and giving fix time period. After modifying again above process is repeated, In the lost if paper is accepted than printing time depend on a Que ( pipe line ) for printing.
Increase your faith in the almighty your prayers will get answered in finite time ....
Well on a serious note: Open Access Journals (so called paid) may be an answer.
This is important to understand what causes a delay in decision process for submitted articles. The delay is usually due to the delayed and non convincing comments of the reviewers forcing the editors to invite more reviewers to finish the process. This eventually takes more time .
Editor usually don't respond to the letters asking for expedited reviews of a submission. A review takes its own time and every editor wishes to finish with a submission within a reasonable time. Some time failing to identify a genuine reviewer for a highly specialized submission is also a problem.
Sanjeev Rastogi
After 3 months ask for postion. After 6 month tell good bye and send in another journal.
However, if you do not receive any response for six months, choose a different journal and send your article there.
Best
It is a serious matter many Journal not response for long times. I am facing this problem and when i continuously asking the status after one year, simple answer work is not related to the Journal so your paper is rejected. Choose good Journals they accept or reject your paper within three months
From my experience, decision takes between one day to three months.Just be patient...
6 months is a big period for decision. It is better to communicate in another journal.
If even reminder no reply from editor, may indicate less interest in particular case. it is better to communicate in another journal preferably on line publication.
It depends upon the impact of journal score
Dr Kamath Madhusudhana
It should not take more than an average of 2-3 weeks. If they have not been responsive, I would suggest withdrawing your manuscript first then submitting it to other journal.
One of my paper is stuck after minor revision submitted on 31/05/2019 and current status is "under review" for more than 6 months. Minor review with only two small changes came. I have mailed twice with one month gap in last two month but no response from the editor yet. I'm literally confused what to do...
Yes, this is a fact and many academician and researchers are facing this kind of problem.
They respond poorly because they know we have limited option for publication beause very few Peer reviewed journals are listed under care list of UGC approved journal.
Publication of the journals are quarterly with less number of Publications. There is overcrowding of manuscripts.
To rectify this problem editor should increase the number of reviewers.
Time limit should be given to the reviewers.
Number of frequency for Publication should be increased.
The number of good journals should be increased.
Then only we can overcome with such kind of problems.
In some organisation atleast one published paper in a year otherwise money will be stoped.
Journal should not take more than one year for publication of a article.
I am also publishing a journal. My experience is that if the information is new and well presented, editorial board is happy to include that information in the journal within a period of 4 seeks but if not up to the mark, they do not convey , therefore delay occurs. Hence, six months is the sufficient time to responde for the editors.
If within 3 months no response it is better to send mamuesctipt to some other journal.
I have face the same problem. I just withdraw the manuscript. Nowadays, the non-open access journals are selecting the best manuscripts . However, we have to try to publish there as the open access journals are charged thousands dollars.
If editor is not giving response it is better to communicate in some other journal. Dont wait for unnessary.
My own candid opinion is that, if you don't hear from the editor for a maximum period of 3 months, you should get in touch with some other reputable journals. This is because RESEARCH is never ending, the longer you stay, the more likely other researchers deal with your proposed research topic.
Waiting is recommended because it is indicative of peer review process. The wait should however not be prohibitive. Over a year to too long to continue waiting while other high impact and peer review journals are waiting for your work. All you need is quality, scientifically acceptable paper through a clean, patient process.
If no reply in 3 months it is better to communicate in another journal.
If you did not get a reply in 3 to 4 months, it is better to withdraw the paper and resubmit it to other journal.
Every one wants earliest publication. In some organisation one paper in a year is must otherwise financial support will be stopped.In view of this 6 months may be sufficent time atleast for acceptanace of the paper.
The time of the editors' decision about manuscripts is different from journal to journal. Some journals announce the time of the first decision on their homepage. In general, open access journals are the fastest for publication.
Editor should not do like this. They must give the status of paper. Mass awareness is required.
Please wait maximum for 2 months. After that, you may ask the editor.
Now a days technology become very much improved, Few repute journals giving publication within 6 months.
In repute open-access journal, generally takes 3 or 4 months for review decision or it is better to withdraw the article and resubmit it to elsewhere.
Many of us experinced this type of problems . Such delay may cause for many dis advantages which some time become difficult to rectify also.
This is very much disappointing not getting any reply from Journal. We have right to get status of our paper. Journals must use modern technology for communications.
brother its depends on the policies and kind of journal , some require between 2 - 3 months some may be more than 7 months
Unfortunately, some journals do not give the importance of an article, only the authors know the work that they have to overcome to get founding, finish all experiments, write, revise and submit the article for a journal. I suggest withdrawing the article when it takes too long and you get no answers. You may have a better experience in another journal that takes your work seriously.
I met same problem. The manuscript was in editor hand for more than 2 months before he made a very simple decision "The paper is not meeting the demand of the Journal" to reject my paper :(
Hello Ahmed,
It all depends on the journal and how busy the editors are. Usually, between two to three months is OK for the reviewers to get back and then for the author to re-submit the paper in a month or so. The overall publishing process is usually between six months to a year depending on the journal. Best wishes, Ahmet
In fact, this bothers me so much, after writing a consent letter for the journal house to take the whole soul of our manuscript, we still wait till eternity to get the reply. I submitted a manuscript to a journal, it took over 7 months, with constant email after that, the journal house just email we are sorry rejected without any reviewers comment. too bad.
In my opinion, the host should give us a nice way to know the way our manuscript review is going in a peace meal.
It is surficing . In fact Technology become so advance , why should we wait, must get on line status.
Exactly @ C.B Ganesh. More than six month for first decision is too much.
Ahmed, waiting times for an editor's decision varies from one journal to another. Some take even longer than a year before you hear from them. Recently, a colleague of mine started a discussion on a similar issue on 'Waiting times' for paper rejections on ResearchGate, which you may find useful to follow.
Usually, the duration time of the first decision is mentioned in most journals' website. You can take it into your consideration before sending the reminder email to the journal's editors. If the decision took significant longer time than the average time mentioned at the journal website, feel free to send the reminder.
Q1: How long time should we wait for editor decision on a manuscript?
Answer1: I think it depends on the journal's processing speed. Different journals may vary in the time before a decision can be given. For me, I waited for 2 months and was notified a pass of desk review. The journal I submitted to was established in 2018, quite new, but also the first international journal and I think it is very promising and will be prominent in the future.
Q2: What to do if we sent a reminder message and did not get a reply for long time?
Answer2: Sending a reminder message (via email in most cases) is ok but do watch the language and be polite if possible. I am not sure 'how long' is counted as 'long' in your question, but one point for sure is that you can still contact the chargers or managers or whatever staff of the journal to see any response. At least, contacting them is not illegal. Or, you can ask other scholars who may also have submitted to this journal and perhaps learn from their experiences. My case is that I did send my journal a reminder after two months' wait, and the manager just sent me back and told me my paper passed the internal desk review and I still have to wait another 4 weeks for peer-review process. This my the situation. Hope my answers can give you a little bit help.
It varies from journal to journal as well as that depends on many factors. Certainly, all of us have grappled with the same issue in certain cases. However, some reviewers contribute free of charge so it might be a revision behind elongation of the process. Add to that, some journals due to their reputation are receiving a large number of papers per month, so it somehow becomes quite hard to distinct authentic paper for processing. By the way, in case a paper is taking more than usual, my recommendation is withdrawal, and sending it for another journal. Nonetheless, for some, it would be vital to publish a paper only in a specific journal since it may match perfectly with your paper, so in that case, you have to wait.
I think the three months is convenient to the first decision. After that you can send a letter to the editor. then wait about another three months.
Technology become so advance, one year is sufficient time for publication.
It is better to check the information about the average publication duration before submitting the paper. It is mostly provided in the journal main pages, if you can’t find it clearly, check this website.
https://www.letpub.com/index.php?page=journalapp
It is useful to get some useful information about SCI journals including; publishing duration, annual volume, Impact factor, and journal ranking. So you can compare different choices and avoid journals that take very long processing time.
Typical, what I do if I dont hear from an editor is send a reminder message, which in most cases I receive a reply, and I I dont, I message for the last time requesting of the paper is worthy of publication or not, and they reply that the paper is still under review. It's just a simple trick though. But you should be aware that it take months to review papers sometimes
Why should encourage for waiting process. This is their duty to update the process.
I think, If journal is looking for minimum two or three reviews.. they must keep updating it on website/ EM that "one review received" "Two reviews received" and when third review is submitted they can update it to "required reviews submitted"
It will make process more transparent ..!!
We should not wait. They should realise the importance of publication.
Ahmed, this is an important issue. Whilst some journals and editors may have fast turnaround times, others tend to take a bit longer than what most academics may anticipate. Sometimes, some journals even take more than a year to send the first round of reviews to the submitting or corresponding author. This time-span is also not a guarantor of eventual publication. Recently, a colleague of mine and I posted a piece on ResearchGate on 'Waiting times' (especially rejected articles), which you may find of interest.
After doing hard work for a year or so, long waiting for acceptance of paper is not reasonable.
Good research journals mention time of processing in journal home page, but if u found that you are not getting reply you can send email to the editor
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Social Science
- Media
- Journalism