I sent a submission to an Elsevier Journal. The status have been "With editor" since a month. I have done a submission to other journal some months before and the "with editor" process was just a week. I want to know if it is normal to wait a long time in order to change of status.
Dear Prof. Jean-Michel Clairand,
I think that's normal. Perhaps the content of the manuscript is too novel and difficult and it takes more time to find the appropriate editor.
Yes, sometimes it happen like that. They may search for the appropriate reviewers for your topic!
Hope you all the best!
Ahmed Elawamry
Dear Prof. Jean-Michel Clairand,
I think that's normal. Perhaps the content of the manuscript is too novel and difficult and it takes more time to find the appropriate editor.
Hi,
This situation can happen. Sometimes it takes time to find a reviewer for an article, and in the meantime the paper is "with editor".
Sometimes it depends on the frequency of the journal. If its quarterly, yes its okay, But don't worry, you will get the decision.
The waiting time may vary. It depends on the publishing house. Currently, I have been waiting for a decision regarding the submitted text for eight months. Sometimes you have to have a lot of patience.
The status of manscript occasionally remains with editor longer than the expacted time due to many manscriptes might have queued before you. Most of editors at the Elseiver journals are too busy, so they need time to screen the manscript or finding reviewers to do the task.
I guess a polite inquiry should be occured after one month of submission to check the status of the munscript why has not been changed since 1 month.
The rushing for question might give an impression for editors that authors are impatient.
Does anyone have access to magazines that are on the SCOPUS list? Best regards and Jun...............
This stage indicates that your paper has not yet been sent for peer review. As per the normal journal processes, the editor first conducts an initial screening of the manuscript. If the manuscript passes this screening, it is sent for peer review.
The time taken for the different stages in the submission process varies across journals, but it is quite normal for the status to show “With editor” for over a month after initial submission. The reason why this stage can take time is that it is often difficult for the editor to find reviewers. The editor identifies suitable reviewers and sends out invitations to them, but on many occasions, the reviewers decline the invitations. If that is the case, the editor has to look for other reviewers.
I think you should wait for at least a month. If you still do not see any change in status, you can send a polite inquiry to the editor.
I agree with the previous answer by Prof. Dr. Dijana Vučković. However, my recent experience leads to the following question: “Is it normal that my Journal submission is "With Editor" after a 6 month?”
This may probably mean your paper is under editorial evaluation. The associate editor may have to assess the paper to ascertain it's suitability before sending it out for review.
It may due to unavailability of editor OR due to no response from invited reviewers by editor. In such cases, I suggest you to kindly drop email to the editor of the journal. Recently, I was having same problem due to site was under some changes; after site work it was under review.
Jean-Michel Clairand
Would you please let me know about how much time the status "with editor" lasted? and what about other stages?
There is nothing unusual about this considering the time stated (1 month). Sometimes, reviewers may not be willing to accept the article for review. Until then, the article remains with the Editor.
Yes definitely it will take time even a longer time too . I have found in my experience a article was lying for 4 months with editor and all of a sudden one fine morning I got a decision quoting as per reviewers comments ...so with editor means sometimes it might be being reviewed by reviewer too..
it seems normal but that is definitely discouraging, except if they can send you a feedback on the issue in time.
Unfortuantely it happens sometime or sometimes they don't update. Hope you got good response.
It is normal, this usually due to the difficulty of finding a reviewer. Also
sometimes the manuscript may be under review but the status will be displayed with editor.
For my case from last 4 month it is showing "waiting for EO checklist", and no reply from editor. Please suggest
In normal procedure if communicate manuscript in one journal until unless get response should not communicate in another journal.If long delay the same should be inform before taking action..
Yes it is normal till to two monts. After, there is problem with reviewers.
Yes. Editor has to see many parameters. If more sript in pipe line.
It's normal if you're lucky. Usually the articles that come to the journal go to the editor first if they are written in accordance with the rules of the journal. Afterwards, it is sent to 2 or 3 reviews for evaluation ,although it changes from one journal to another. A period of at least 1 or 1.5 months is allowed for evaluation. Then the procedure continues as rejection, acceptance or revision.
One month is nothing . Wait atlest 3-6 months for any response.
Yes it is quite normal to have your joutnsl rendered "with the editor" after a month and possibly up to several months
One month with the editor is too long, more than one months to invite reviewers and to review a paper is common.
H.G.Dill
usually Elsevier journals editors do works in mean times. it some cases the an early check by editor require time and sometimes the invited reviewers do not accept the review of paper, so the editor should send the paper to other ones. also it is possible that the journal editor is changing or changed recently. however low ranked journals are sometimes very late in progressing works or in fact do so slowly that it is better to withdraw the paper from them.
Keep patient. Maybe the associated editor is reviewing your paper before peer-review process.
It is perfectly normal for a submission to remain with the editor for over two weeks. The time taken for the different stages varies from journal to journal, but it is not uncommon for the journal system to show a “with editor” status for over a month after submission.
At this stage, the editor has two tasks to complete:
1. He/she has to complete the initial screening of the manuscript.
2. If the manuscript passes the initial screening, the editor has to send it for peer review.
The reason why this stage takes time is that it is often very difficult for the editor to find reviewers. The editor identifies suitable reviewers and sends out invitations to them, but on many occasions, the reviewers decline the invitations. Then the editor has to look for other reviewers.
If this status reappears after some time, this could mean that the original referees have not sent their reports and the editor is looking for other referees
It can be normal, especially for high quality Journals. The time duration for manuscript process varies from journal to Journal.
It is normal, depending on the Journal. High quality Journals takes time to complete review process. This could be attributed to large number of manuscripts received and being processed within a time duration.
Some Editors are 'not sleeping' and are assiduously working round the clock to meet up with the task before them, but it seems sometimes they're constrained with reviewers' slow response to take up the job. In this case, write politely to the Chief Editor, as a way to urge more. If nothing heard in the next 3-4weeks, well, decide on your own as other chosen (optional) journals may be worse and on this. Bear in mind that delay in reviewing process is generally becoming slow. Authors are increasing in number exponentially, while those to review are not at par, by number to meet up. I think it is high time the reviewer's role mandated for editorial board members without necessary looking outside to emulate some active journals that I know.
Yes, it is very normal. It depends on journal. I would suggest you go to some forums and see if any people are following the same journal. Some journals are not very efficient in processing the manuscripts, Usually the editor receives the manuscript and hand out to the reviewers in this area, this would take up to 2-3 weeks. The reviewers would spend up to 5 weeks (although a lot of journals give 3 weeks timeline) reviewing and providing comments. Then the editor will gather the information from the reviewers and send back to you anytime from then on.
This is the normal practice manuscript with editor. Journal should realise the importance of publication for scholars.
Some of the journal in their website says about their possibilitypossibilitfirst of first decision in particular days approximately 35 days or 40 days...But still they don't adhere to their process...
But Elsevier never say...
So we have to wait patiently..
The bad part is that we fear to write to editor thinking that our mail may cause rejection of the content
The normal deadline for admission is regulated according to the requirements of the magazine. A common term is 1 to 4 months. So see if the deadline is specified. Yours sincerely Emil Yankov
Unfortionatly, it is very normal depending on journal and quality of the manuscripts.
Unfortunately this is the case now.
This situation have to be changed. Editors should realise the importance of time for scholars.
For publication long waiting is not good practice. In variour organisations scholer has to publish SCI paper other wise financial support may be stoped.
Unfortunately, it is normal. It depends on journal and area of your research.
I guess it can happen when the paper is worth reviewed by taking its time than rushing in to a decision of reject or sending to reviewers which is not as bad as it could feel to the authors. I wish I know the outcome in your case Jean-Michel Clairand
High quality Journals takes time to complete review process. This could be attributed to large number of manuscripts received and being processed within a time duration. After months also depends on your manuscript quality you will get response from journal.
As the handling editor of a journal, I try to identify willing reviewers as quickly as possible, usually within the first week of receiving the manuscript from the Editor-in-Chief. But often it takes requests to multiple potential reviewers to find two that are both capable of providing an unbiased review and willing to do it. Often reviewers are busy or are unwilling to review a manuscript. This could be because they know the work has problems and either prefer not to provide an unfavorable review or realize that a constructive review of this particular manuscript would be extraordinarily time-consuming and choose therefore to decline to review it. In these cases, the process of finding reviewers can easily exceed a month, especially during the holiday season!
You can give the reminder and ask about progress in review process.
Any author should not feel intimidated and should feel free to communicate with the editor regarding questions about your manuscript. It is not bad form to do so.
One month time is quite normal. It is better to give reminder
It's normal. However, what is not normal is when they keep you waiting for 6 months only to reject the paper. Or when you have to revise the comments from one reviewer more than 5 times in a period of 5 months, each time responding to different queries.
It is quite normal for editors to take this time, probably they must have called reviewers who might have not responded quickly. If it is desk rejection that should come pretty quickly.
Rarely, although we don't like to admit it, manuscripts slip through the cracks and handling editors simply forget to request reviewers for a manuscript. It is then that the Editor-in-Chief or some staff member at the Publisher sends a reminder to the handlig editor to request reviews. This process, of course, can lengthen the review process as well.
Your paper may be in pipe line. Editor office send the manuscript for review. Usally not informed to condidate.
This time of year with all the holidays is especially challenging because so many potential reviewers do not have time right now to review. Things move at a sliwer pace in december, it seems.
It is normal. It could be the editor is reading the work to see whether it is alright before sending for review
Yes, it is normal, may be for initial consideration, find suitable reviewers and other reasons
One month is normal for the Editor to search appropriate reviewers.
Mine has been with editor " Arabian Journal" for more than six months, is it normal?
Hi Emmanuel,
No, it should not take that long ordinarily. I suggest writing to the editor and requesting an update on the status of your manuscript.
It is quite normal. This indicate number of papers in pipe line with Editor.
Yes. Its normal. Further, you may rack status of your manuscript through dashboard (Dont know either available in your case or not?) .
I've had a strange situation. I sent the manuscript in November 2017. It wasn't until December 2018 that I received the information "Dear Lady, your text will be published" (I'm a male, so I was confused.) Several times I sent questions (in 2018 and 2019) about the status of my text; always unanswered. Fortunately, it was published in 2020 (with date 2019). But I admit that I was already very impatient. I waited only because I was informed (as a woman) that the text was accepted. Luckily, it was the only such experience.
Once I happened to wait about six months, but I also got a positive answer. Usually the editorial team answers within 4-6 weeks.
With Editor means just lying with editor without any process.
One of my submissions is with the editor since 6 months of submission. It hasnt yet been sent for review. Is this a good sign? I have written two polite enquiries to the editor so far, but with no concrete progress. Can anyone suggest what can I do?
Within a month Editor communicate acknowledgement. 1 year is sufficient period for publication.
Its better you bring to the notice of chief editor of the journal. They will ask somebody to assist you.
I think It is possible. I had a similar experience once and finally a manuscript was accepted. Just be patient.
It's saddening that after long delay by some Editors, they keep the manuscript without sending out for review process and worse still after it's sent and several months to nearly year (s) they may still reject it. This attitude is worrisome because an unfortunate delay to get an idea published may jeopardize credit for the author of first discovery in some situations, such idea may be in pipeline elsewhere while it is kept unprocessed and eventually rejected in a journal. Assuming a paper once rejected but later chosen for a scientific accolade had been such delayed, the idea might be lost to another authors who might be reporting similar discovery.
Overtime, I have heard or read about illegitimacy on the side of authors who break submission/publishing rule, but it's rare to see such similar debate about lordship behaviours of those Editors who by their attitudes punish the authors.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Journal Articles