This is what I just saw yesterday for a paper I reviewed for an Elsevier Journal. I found one reviewer completely rejected the manuscript, that there is nothing novel, and yet I barely found any work related to the article in any of the major abstracting and indexing databases, as well as google. The second reviewer, recommended minor revisions with some 8 lines of comments. I gave the paper a very good read, had about 8 typed pages of comments that could improve the quality of the manuscript. Indeed I identified some correctable mistakes to be attended to which could help improve the paper even if it were not accepted for publication in the same journal.

This should be the heart of reviewers, to give constructive comments which improve the quality of the manuscripts. In fact, most serious Journals nowadays do not evaluate manuscripts based on their novelty but rather what it adds to literature, as well as the rigorousness of the methodology employed and discussions advanced. Thank you for this good question.

Hi Heba Y. Elbasiouny, of course this reviewer acted absolutely unprofessional. The only good thing about this is that you have the chance to revise the paper. Just try to address all points raised by both reviewers and submit the revised version. Good luck!

Thanks so much Prof. Frank for you helpful answer.

I will do.

All the best

Dear Heba Y. Elbasiouny, in any case don't let this unprofessional reviewer discourage you. Something like that can happen to the most established researchers. 😎

Dear Heba Y. Elbasiouny, we should not be disappointed if the paper is rejected, it should be submitted after minor revision in another reputable journal. The same practice should be continued until it is accepted in a well reputable journal.

Hi Heba Y. Elbasiouny, I agree with Dr Kamran Zakaria in that submission of the revised manuscript to another good journal would also be a reasonable option.

Dear Prof. Frank T. Edelmann and Dr Kamran Zakaria

Thanks so much for both of you.

Indeed, it is not discouraged or disappointed me, I just was very surprised because most of the comments were irrational. The good thing is the final decision was a major revision and the journal is good, so I will replay all the comments and send it again.

Thanks again for your support.

Sincerely

Dear Heba

I have had this situation for one of my papers. I answered the reviewer's comments point by point and also I wrote a letter to the editorial board with some eligible descriptions about the other reviewer. Finally, it accept and published. I wish all the journals used DOUBLE BLIND REVIEW method.

Bests

Iman

Dear Heba Y. Elbasiouny Even authors who went on to become famous have faced the same predicament. Don't be discouraged. Work on the deficiencies identified & improve the paper.

Dear Dr. Iman,

You are right I also encourage double blind review and the letter to editorial board is a good idea, but sometimes they didn't answer.

My regards

Dear Dr Emmanuel,

Thanks so much, of course I will do with no disencourgement but just still surprised.

My regards

If a reviewer rejects your paper without valid points, just respond to the points and give reasons why your position is better than that of the reviewer, and leave the rest for the editor to decide. I know the editor will do needful.

Best regards

Thanks so much Dr.Oluyinka,

I already did and I am waiting the response.

My best regards

In such a case where two reviews are contradictory, a professional Editor would should ask an adjudicative reviewer to make a final recommendation.

Yes, a paper should be sent to two to three journals at a time, if one accepts then it may be withdrawn from others.

Dear All, personally I would strongly suggest NOT to submit a paper to two or three different journals at a time. This is clearly against the rules of most reputable journals. Normally, during the online submission process, you will be asked: "Is this manuscript solely submitted to this journals?" There is another serious risk when submitting a manuscript simultaneously to different journals: Chances are, the one reviewer receives the same manuscript from two different journals.

Dear Prof. Frank T. Edelmann

Yes, it happens to send the paper to the third reviewer in case of contradiction, but now the editor already made the final decision with major revision.

Dear Dr. Ramatu Ussif

thanks for your answer, but it is not a good idea to send your paper to more than one journal as Prof. Frank T. Edelmann mentioned it is against the rules of most reputable journals, and every time you submit a paper you asked if you sent it to another journal. I think also there is something such as a block to submit to this journal or something like this if the editorial board discovered this.

All the best to all of you,

Dear Prof Frank T. Edelmann, some times reputable journal's negative reply comes after one year or six months, What should be done in order to safe time.

Dr. Kamran Zakaria

Just, I will send it to other journal. I will not give up my Dear Heba Y. Elbasiouny .

It is not good to review a work with biased mind and the editor should read the review comments if unsatisfactory should consider other Reviewer comments.

Dear Dr. Dr Kamran Zakaria it happened to me 3 times, however, I didn't send my paper elsewhere: The first time my paper took 11 months, the second took 13 months and accepted in both after revision, while in the third time I sent to the editor after six months to ask about my paper and the answer was unfortunate, he didn't find reviewers and you are free to send it to another journal. In this time only I can send it, or if you withdraw your paper officially you can send it, otherwise no.

You can take a look at this link, for example, in the section Ethica personalities of authors

https://www.springer.com/authors/manuscript+guidelines?SGWID=0-40162-6-793301-0

Good luck

Dear Dr. Maged Gumaan Bin-Saad thanks so much for your answer, I already didn't give up, but the final decision was a major revision, so I revised it and sent back to the same journal firstly to see what will happen.

My regards,

Dear Dr. Emmanuel Ifeanyi Obeagu thanks so much for your answer,

You are right and this is what happened with the editor, he didn't consider the rejection and decided a major revision. I also hope for a reviewer to be with a biased mind and be a professional as implied by Prof Frank T. Edelmann before.

My regards,

Thanks, Heba Y. Elbasiouny, for the right guidance.

Dr. Kamran Zakaria

Rejection is not new to every writer and that always happening when you submit your manuscript to them. In other case, they will give you more comments to correct it. All we need to do is to be positive always and keep trying. One thing more, There are so many journals that you can use them for submission.

sad

Thanks so much Dr. Ronald Valledor Gomeseria

Of course, the rejection is not new for every writer but it is a frustrating thing even for a short time, especially if it comes from a biased reviewer. He put 6 comments in the abstract only, the first one about a statement refers to the research background, it found in the basic and nonbasic references, his comment was it is imprecise. Another one of the 6; you should not write the method but the chemicals (with notice that the chemical in one method only will be written in two lines in the abstract). Anyway, there are different schools and we should answer the comment convincingly and scientifically.

My best regards

I will try my best to be able to complete the revision.

Yes, Tuti Dharmawati

This what I did.

Many thanks

While it's hard not to take review bias or a rejection personally, it probably wasn't targeting you personally. The reviewer could be struggling, or have another agenda, or just be a bad reviewer. That's not on you. Take the high road.

If you originally submitted to a high quality journal, you may find useful comments even in the rejections that you can use to revise your paper and make it stronger (if not for this journal, than for another). Maybe use the bad review as a benchmark of your worst possible critic, and write to make you paper clearer to those who are not do not have the expertise you do, like perhaps this bad reviewer.

I agree with the view of Valrie Chambers, but I am held back from calling this reviewer a bad reviewer. A reviewer is not good because he/she passes every paper that comes to him; neither is one bad because s/he rejects some papers that he assesses.

One key requirement is to ensure that the paper aligns with the presentation, quality & formatting stipulations of the Journal where we wish to publish. If this is done, the editor will usually tamper the reviewer's comments, particularly if they are out of alignment with the Journal's terms & conditions.

Overall, use these remarks to strengthen your paper further consideration by the Journal or an alternative Journal.

Generally, if two of the three reviewers turn in a favorable report (e.g. Minor revision), while one rejects the article, the editor is likely to return a major revision verdict. The issue of Journal article review is a complex, emotional, environmental and technical process. Keep your urgency, but have patience!

At all times own your work and stand by what you consider is right, based on your research and say so to the Editor. Reputable journals select reviewers according to their 'verified' areas of specialization.

This happens to me as well. I got a long paragraph of comments which makes no sense at all and editor decided to reject my paper. I understood the reviewer has no knowledge on that particular area so do the editor. I send a detailed reply to the editor and requested him to select the reviewer carefully. He asked me to resubmit my manuscript and I politely denied. Don't hesitate to reply the editor if the reviewer comments are not appropriate. You must have an option to resubmit without corrections with the explanation.

All the best

Rejection is no longer news to authors but it can be discouraging. If I'm optimistic about my research and it's rejected, it does mean one thing to me. That I have to be steadfast, check my loopholes and exploit it

What does it matter?. The journal asked for a revision so revise where possible and explain why if you don't. Any kind of revision is much better than rejection.

Best wishes from an often rejected colleague, D. Booth

This is a common issue that happens with most of the authors. That's why the editor sends a manuscript to several reviewers for review. And I believe the editor does not give much attention to those reviewer's comments, those who reject a manuscript without proper explanation. Recently, I encounter the opposite experience. The editor rejects my manuscripts; though, all the reviewer's comments seemed like minor revision.

Dear Ali Newaz Bahar, sorry to hear that, but apparently this happens more often nowadays. Apparently Editors of reputed journals receive a surplus of good manuscripts. After all I fully agree with David Eugene Booth in that Heba Y. Elbasiouny was lucky in the end that the Editor's decision was "major revision" and not rejection.

It's better to revise the manuscript and then submit to the same or a new journal.

If they provide good suggestions, after modification with cordially accepting that, i submit again in another good and favorable journal.

Take the critics seriously and change your manuscript accordingly and resubmit to a stronger journal

if you fell the reviewer comments are nonsense, reply to editor explaining that with references

This is what I just saw yesterday for a paper I reviewed for an Elsevier Journal. I found one reviewer completely rejected the manuscript, that there is nothing novel, and yet I barely found any work related to the article in any of the major abstracting and indexing databases, as well as google. The second reviewer, recommended minor revisions with some 8 lines of comments. I gave the paper a very good read, had about 8 typed pages of comments that could improve the quality of the manuscript. Indeed I identified some correctable mistakes to be attended to which could help improve the paper even if it were not accepted for publication in the same journal.

This should be the heart of reviewers, to give constructive comments which improve the quality of the manuscripts. In fact, most serious Journals nowadays do not evaluate manuscripts based on their novelty but rather what it adds to literature, as well as the rigorousness of the methodology employed and discussions advanced. Thank you for this good question.

The editorial decision of recommending major revision, anyway, was against the opinion given by this reviewer to reject. This is reflective of editorial team's rational judgement, which should encourage you in revising the submission as suggested and resubmit.

One more important aspect, which clearly is not true in your case, is not all authors are open for inviting reviewers' opinions that don't match with theirs. Also we need to discern that some reviewers don't take enough time to comprehensively comment on a paper they are rejecting, which is not a recommended practice and would actually mean injustice to the assigned responsibility.

All the best with revised submission.

Follow This Link Please:

https://www.editage.com/insights/behind-the-scenes-how-a-journal-editor-reaches-a-decision-on-a-manuscript-after-peer-review

revision manuscript and submit in new journal .

Make a list of your relevant journal and do try from the top journal, because their reviews will help you for the improvement (in case of rejection)

You can try to write to the Editor of the journal asking for another reviewer. I am not sure that it helps, but you can try if you have good arguments.

Heba Y. Elbasiouny Better to send a message to the editor regarding this. If the editor takes the reviewer's side. Withdrawing from the current journal and submitting to another journal as soon as possible would be better.

Hello

In my view, the chief editor of the journal only takes a decision upon the review comment. If the comments on the research raised by the reviewer are nonsense type, then the chief editor can assign the paper to any other reviewer. As an author, you have no right to put any question to the reviewer. The author's work is to modify the research as per the reviews comments and resubmit it.

Thanks

Dear Radha MOHAN Pattanayak in my personal experience chances are higher that manuscripts are "nonsense type" than reviewers' comments.

@ Heba Y. Elbasiouny, I do agree with Chinthaka Premachandra.

Some years back I have expressed my views in the line with question submitted which I present herewith same for your kind perusal In our own publication & even research paper also , when it gets rejected by Journal , it certainly offer us disappointment as it involves our reading ,our study , including our discussing with our friends when such labor gets rejected we may feel certainly dis hearten.

With this we can not afford to keep for our study or research with fore headed hand for which we have to carry out our own introspection & also try to view the publication of other writers related to research in the journal which may help us to offer a guideline .

This is my personal opinion