I know it gives another chance to resubmit after major revision. But could corresponding author consider "Reject & Resubmit" as a simple reject, and submit the article to another journal? Should corresponding author ask for permission of previous journal?
The meaning of 'reject & resubmit' is to indicate that in principle the editor likes the topic for their journal, but the current paper is somehow fatally flawed in their eyes. Usually, it would require redoing some of the empirical work, or at least the data analysis. The work that needs to be done is so extensive, that it will take time. editors don't like such papers to remain in their workflow, as it clutters the editorial software, and pollutes the statistics for review speed.
To answer your question explicitly, it is en encouragement to resubmit, but you are free to submit it elsewhere instead, as (for now) the review process with this journal has formally ended.
Hi,
The decision to "reject & resubmit" is strange since it should be either one of the two, or the paper is completely rejected, and then it cannot be resubmitted, or it could be accepted if major or minor changes are done in the paper. The decision to reject is final, so how could one resubmit following a rejection ?
The paper that is rejected by one journal could find another "home" and you could send it to another journal. There is no shortage of scientific journals in any discipline.
The meaning of 'reject & resubmit' is to indicate that in principle the editor likes the topic for their journal, but the current paper is somehow fatally flawed in their eyes. Usually, it would require redoing some of the empirical work, or at least the data analysis. The work that needs to be done is so extensive, that it will take time. editors don't like such papers to remain in their workflow, as it clutters the editorial software, and pollutes the statistics for review speed.
To answer your question explicitly, it is en encouragement to resubmit, but you are free to submit it elsewhere instead, as (for now) the review process with this journal has formally ended.
Yes, its a rejection from one journal and proposing that the article is sent to another journal but in this instance, you don't need to seek permission from the former.
Best wishes
I agree with Dr. Renee Wever. The topic of the article may be within the scope of the journal but the manuscript needs extensive revision. So you can re-write the article and submit again as a new submission to this journal or any other.
Thank you very much for your prompt responses, I got my answer.
But I just want to clarify that in decision letter editor informs that the paper cannot be processed for publication in Journal, but he also informs "However since there are some merit in the paper, I would be willing to reconsider if you wish to undertake major revisions and re-submit", and he suggests some revisions which one of them needs long period of time to perform.
Kind regards
Perhaps, you could consider defending your stance if you think the suggestion for revision is not feasible. However, you should consider revising and resubmitting since its suggested by the editor although it may take some time.
Best wishes.
'Reject' means that the paper in the present format is 'Not Acceptable'. However, the authors can revise the manuscript based on the reviewer's comments / suggestions and resubmit the paper. If the authors agree with the reviewer's comments, then they can suitably revise the manuscript and resubmit. The Editor may send the revised manuscript to the same reviewers or may send to different reviewers. If the authors do not agree with reviewer's comments, then they have no other option except to send the paper to another Journal. Sometimes, it may so happen that the paper is not suitable for the particular Journal. In such a case, the Editor may suggest to submit the paper to another Journal.
Based on the comments of the reviewer the paper will be rejected if there are major corrections in the paper.
If the corrections are minor , do the necessary changes and it can be resubmitted in the same journal .
Both will be decided by the editor of the particular journal based on the reviewer comments.
Here is a nice article on that topic: https://scientistseessquirrel.wordpress.com/2017/11/20/why-journals-like-reject-but-resubmit/
Thank you all for this fruitful discussion.
I do agree that, in your case, the editor see your paper has some merits. However, the reviewer comments are against your work. So, he is giving you another chance to try your luck with his journal
Sometimes the reviewers reject the paper outright if there is basic flaw in assumptions or problem formulation is wrong or statements made in the paper are self contradictory. Such a possibility is rare.
A 'Reject and resubmit' decision is very similar to 'Revise and resubmit. ' It indicates that the editor has seen some merit in your study, but it is not publishable in its current form. Usually, it would require extensive revision, in most cases, adding new experiments or redoing the data analysis.
Reject and resubmit means the research article is rejected in its current form. Based on the reviewers comment the Editor rejected the article but found some merit too. Now it's author choice if it wish to submit the paper again after carefully revising the manuscript. The author can submit the article in another journal without taking the permission of the Editor. If the author resubmitted the paper after revising it the Editor can choose if it wanted to send the manuscript to the same reviewers or others.
Reject and resubmit means that the journal will no longer categorize your paper as an active manuscript in-process. They will close your previous submission record. You are welcome to resubmit, but it will be treated as a completely new cycle of approval, not a continuation of the old one.
I doubt if any Editor of a peer reviewed Journal returns the manuscript of a paper with the comments 'Reject and Resubmit'. It is either 'Rejected' or 'Resumit' taking into account reviewer's comments and suggestions. Normally a paper is rejected when all the reviewers clearly reject the paper.
Girish Kumar Ramaiah
Actually there are some editors who do this, they reject the paper but they also state that you are welcomed to resubmit a revised manuscript. The resubmission will be treated as a new submission but it should be accompanied by a cover letter explains the revisions been made. It happened to me once.
I got that decision on one of my papers after submitting a revision. I wish I could know the reasons behind such a decision.
For the revised version, the handling editor asked a different reviewer, and based on the comments from that reviewer who explicitly recommend rejecting the manuscript and resubmitting the revised version, the editor made that decision. It could have been another revision.
I still can't figure out why the editor sent the manuscript to a different reviewer after the revision; it was a minor revision. One of the reviewers accepted the revised version before this stage.
Let me share my experience on this matter. I received a "reject and resubmit" today and was not sure how to interpret it. The editor read the paper carefully and suggested a couple of improvements before the paper would be suitable to be sent to reviewers. If I would like to resubmit it, I should do so within the next 6 months. However this still does not guarantee that the paper will get accepted by the reviewers. Still, I take it as a positive sign as I have had many rejections during the pandemic months.
I mention my case as the decision came before the review process even started. Thanks for the good thread!
Boubekeur Med Boubekeur Med
Can you please tell me in such case, author can submit the paper in other journal without the approval of editor.
My article has been rejected and given a chance to resubmit after 3 months but before 6 months. If I submit it to other journal, then it would lead to any problem or I am free to submit. Does the IEEE database contains the contents.
Prashant Kumar
You don't have to resubmit your manuscript to the same journal, you are free to submit it to any journal you want, and even if you resubmit your manuscript to the same journal it will be considered as a new submission anyway, so there is no difference
Hi,
this decision sounds like oxymoronic (self-contradiction), since , or the article is rejected, for various reasons, or it should be revised and resubmitted. Strange editorial decision!
In my experience as both an author and a peer revieer reviewer there are several options. Accept as is (rare), accept with minor revisions, accept with major revisions. Reject (they don't want to see it again). I guess another option is
"resubmit as a letter to the editor." ,
Friends, this type of editorial decision is actually intended because authors do more responsiblity and precision in addressing the shortcomings of their manuscript.
I've never received such a decision. Normally, it's Reject or Resubmit (with minor or major revisions). Unless further clarification was provided, I'd email the journal to see how to proceed.
Stephan C. Mann I have not seen such a decision either, and it makes no sense to me. It can only mean that the paper is rejected and submission to another journal is recommended.
Frank T. Edelmann-That is one possibility, although it seems rather obscure without further explanation. I have seen "resubmit as a letter to the editor" but there also, some form of explanation is provided.
Omar H. Abdalla-that sounds like a reasonable explanation. The comments regarding the reason for rejection and those regarding revision are the key. I had never seen that term used. Thanks!
Dear Stephan C. Mann normally, if resubmission to the same journal was possible, I would expect to see the decision "major revision". "Reject & submit" is rather strange.
Frank T. Edelmann I see it is an often practice - if the paper is interesting, but needs significant improvements the editors highlight the possibility of re-sub, however often it is expected that contact author first sends to the editor an e-mail with highlighted serious corrections.
regards,
GB
Dear Grzegorz Boczkaj yes, but in this case the decision is normally "major revision".
Frank T. Edelmann-I agree. in my experience, if a journal thinks a paper is of interest and salvageable but needs a lot of work they will use the term "major revisions." If they have no interest in a paper and the peer-reviewers lean towards "reject", they will say "it does not meet our editorial needs at this time.", meaning they never want to be bothered with it again.
Hi,
It could be that the paper was rejected in its present form, but will be accepted if it is revised.
Dear Avishag Gordon in that case the decision of the Editor would have been either "minor revision" or "major revision". Reject is reject!
Dear frank,
Another possibility is "rejected from our journal", revise and submit elsewhere…
Avishag Gordon-it could mean that well. It's just after I've put in all the time writing the paper, and experience all that anxiety opening the letter from the journal regarding my fate, I'd appreciate a clear answer regarding acceptance/rejection.
Correction-"it could well mean that." My wife was calling me for dinner.
Its meaning rejected as free submission and now suggesting author to publish in their sister paid journal
Dear Shalendra Singh yes, you got it! Very good point. Apparently this has become a common practice of high-ranked journals to reject manuscripts and redirect them to their paid Open Access journals.
How many reviewers review a paper?
On what circumstances would an Editor in Chief to reassign the re submitted paper to another person to handle?
Dear Adekunle Ajibode I can only the first part of your question. In our field of research, chemistry, the submitted manuscripts are normally sent to 2-3 reviewers. High-ranked journals often choose even 4 reviewers.
Shalendra Singh -that could very well be what they are up to! Thanks for your comment, Avishag Gordon!
Dear Stephan C. Mann and Adekunle Ajibode for more information please see this very useful article entitled Q: What is the meaning of 'Reject & Resubmit'?
https://www.editage.com/insights/what-is-the-meaning-of-reject-resubmit
Thanks T. Edelmann-very informative! I do a reasonable amount of peer-review and have never been offered "Reject & Resubmit" as an option for my use. It's always, accept, accept with minor revisions, accept with major revisions, reject.
Perhaps it's something the Editor can use after reviews are in?
Dear Stephan C. Mann yes, the decision "Reject & Resubmit" was absolutely new for me too. I also suspect that Editors can use this when they get only "major revision" decisions from the reviewers. In such case it's perhaps advisable to the authors that they revise their manuscript accordingly and resubmit it to another journal.
Hi Frank T. Edelmann-i think it would be hard for me to know what to do if I received such a decision. On the one hand, no one at the journal particularly liked the article or thought it worthy of publication without a great deal of work. On the other hand, they did not outright reject it and presumably provided extensive guidelines for revision. As someone suggested earlier, resubmitting might be preferable to starting up de novo with another journal?
Dear Stephan C. Mann yes, that's exactly what I mean. In such a case I would revise the manuscript according to the reviewers' comment and submit the improved manuscript to another (better?) journal. It's still not clear to me why they just didn't decide for "reject".
It implies, take a look at your manuscript, revise the title and abstract. Restructure the introduction to better announce the title. Look at the Research objectives and make sure they were established. Revise the analysis of results and connect them with either research questions or research hypotheses. Revise the conclusion to accurately focus on the new results announce in the title, research questions, and analysis of results.
We should not feel bad anytime our manuscript is been rejected. In fact, I prefer to use the word, "bounced back" instead of "rejection". Common, I must revise and shoot again.
I received the same decision (reject and resubmit), and the editor gave me one month to do the corrections that reviewers suggested. When I looked at the comments I found that they are not major and it is possible to do them in two days. I did the corrections in one week and resubmitted the article. In the same day the status was Awaiting EO. Next day the status changed into under review. It is under review since 3 days.
Journal editors use this as a trick to make their official publication speeds look better.
Because when you resubmit your papers, they can reset the “First Submission” time.
In reality, it has no difference from “Major Revision”. This was what I experienced recently for my paper submitted to a journal, which was accepted after resubmission.
A rejection letter is the one sent by the journal editor to the corresponding author. It mentions the final status of the research manuscript. This letter primarily mentions the reason(s) for rejecting the manuscript. On the other hand, an appeal letter is a response to the editor’s rejection letter. It is sent by the corresponding author to the journal editor if the author has strong reasons to justify the publication of his/her research. An appeal letter includes some critical components to have an impact on the editor’s final decision. If an author’s work is rejected, it is a good idea to see if the journal has an appeal policy. This will provide specific guidelines for the appeal letter. Appealing the rejection of academic research is like appealing the rejection of most other things—if the author chooses to commit the time and is willing to risk reputation, then success is most likely to result from keeping emotions calm, being respectful, and sticking to the facts...
https://www.enago.com/academy/q/9962/what-is-the-difference-between-a-rejection-letter-and-an-appeal-letter/?utm_source=emailer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news_151220
This situation just happened to me. A paper was evaluated and two reviewers gave opinions, major and manor revisions.
Editor rejected the ms, and asked us to revise it according to Reviewers' comments, and resubmit to the journal.
For me it was very confusing decission, as non of the reviewers rejected the ms...
Obviously, such situations are possible... 😌
Reject snd resubmit as there is something not major in your ms need corrections as format of the paper, references, ...
To me, it's a deceitful way of returning your work to a new submission date, among other editorial tricks. It also points largely to "major revision". However, like the questioner inquired, one of the two contrasting words ("reject") gives you a good lawful opportunity to choose, without any formal request from the journal, to resubmit to other journal bear in mind that if the journal is favourably your choice the date of submission is the new date, one of the tricks by many editors. Accept the second contrasting word ("resubmit") as "if you like to choose submission to our journal". Period!
"Reject and resubmit" means although the manuscript looks nice or novel (perhaps the concept), it has major flaws such as poor design. Hence, authors would have to go back to the lab to start the study all over again. The new version of the manuscript may be resubmitted (to the previous journal) or submitted to another journal depending on the preference of the author(s). However, this phrase could easily be wrongly used. It is totally different from "accept with major revision" (which might be finally rejected if poorly revised), and "accept with minor revision".
I have received same reply " reject and resubmit" from Molecular Simulation with some reviewers comments. Can I resubmit here or another journal?
It is a chance to improve your manuscript for its identified errors and then resubmit.
It gives a hope to the authors to have a chance to publish in the journal where they intend to publish it. However, authors are not liable to 'must' submit the manuscript again to the same journal. So it can be considered as a bit lower degree 'harsh' decision than that of a simple rejection.
It means rejection but still have some chances of publication if resubmitted after major/recommended revisions/additions.
Dear Farhad Jahanfar , there is very related thread at Academia:
What does “reject and resubmit” mean?
There are many answers there. It deserves attention.
https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/56531/what-does-reject-and-resubmit-mean
The exact meaning is that a manuscript is not publishable in its submitted form. It requires a substantial revision, usually in the study methodology. The connotational meaning is that the manuscript, in the eyes of the editor, has some merit, albeit unpublishable. Simply put, the manuscript is not totally unpalatable!
Cheers,
For a good explanation of the term "Reject and Resubmit" please see the attached author guidelines entitled "Submitting a Manuscript to Medical Decision Making – Information for Authors".
In these guidelines it is stated that "We sometimes reject an article but invite a resubmission that addresses specific concerns of the Editors (“Reject and Resubmit”). Such an invitation means that the Editors believe it is possible that the research described is of potential interest and would have a chance of eventual acceptance if presented in a different manner. Invariably, this decision usually means that the paper must be changed fundamentally. Unfortunately, we cannot make any guarantee that the resubmission will be successful."
Everyone decides for himself. In my opinion, this expression is more than harsh, I personally would not resend articles to this journal. Speaking in Russian, "You can't be lovely by force", and the author is not a gold coin to be nice for everyone (I. Bunin). Without lowering the requirements for yourself, it makes sense to look for a journal where the author is understood better.
I fully agree with the opinion by Vadim S. Gorshkov. In the case of such a "Reject and Resubmit" decision the authors should seriously consider submitting the manuscript to a different and perhaps more suitable (or even better) journal. All points raised by the original reviewers should be carefully considered. The revised manuscript will then be of much better quality than the original one. Thus it will have good chances being accepted right away by another journal and new reviewers.
It might seem "harsh" as indicated by Vadim S. Gorshkov. Nevertheless, it could be a blessing in disguise as pointed out by Prof. Frank T. Edelmann. Therefore, it should not be deemed personal. For me, I would keenly consider the feedback from the reviewers of a rejecting journal, make necessary revisions, and submit elsewhere.
Two things we should remember while aiming for publishing. The first is peer review is double-blind/blind—reviewers do not know of/about a manuscript writer. Second is every journal has its own standards—some of which are very high. The rejection could be not due to flaws in the manuscript, but because the targeted journal may not publish certain research designs. For example, some top-tier journals might not accept quasi-experimental pretest-posttest one-group research since they think extraneous variables (e.g., maturity, history, test administration, type of test) could have accounted for the findings. Such a doubt drives reviewers/editor's hesitation, resulting in rejection.
Cheers,
Perhaps the editor is sure that in its current form the article cannot be published, but he sees some potential in it, so he proposes to completely rewrite it (in accordance with the requirements of the reviewers (by the way, we do not know what was in the reviews, as well as in the article itself)), and resubmit it. Personally, I have not had this experience. At most - minor recomendations from reviewers, so I am a bad advisor.
IMO, this is the second time that happens to me the same thing with the same journal, first time I did the corrections and got accepted without any other change. I believe you feel the sense of acceptance or rejection in the comments of the reviewers like "looking forward to review the paper again with the corrections". I feel this second time will happen the same thing. Although I agree if the paper needs a completely different approach then it may be reasonable to chose another journal.
Cheers,
The revision comments requires further rework and considerable revision which may not be possible to do within the time allotted for a regular major revision. Therefore, some journals currently offer "Reject and Resubmit" decision and give you extensive time frame (3 or more months) to revise the manuscript. The comments of the reviewers should have been addressed while submitting again. The resubmission will be sent to the same set of reviewers who commented on your manuscript previously. Resubmission does not guarantee acceptance. The author are free to submit the journal elsewhere also.
Reject and resubmit: The paper is rejected based on the some comments from the reviewers/editors. But the same paper can be again submitted as a new paper to the same journal after incorporating all the corrections.
Reject: The paper can not be resubmitted again to the same journal even though we corrected the paper according to the comments.
Different reasons are mentioned for retraction of article by Retraction Watch.
An excellent resource/database.
https://retractionwatch.com/retraction-watch-database-user-guide/retraction-watch-database-user-guide-appendix-b-reasons/
It is really very nice question. My own understanding, that my article has been rejected to publication as it is. But, the editor liked my article, so, he asked me to clarify some treatments and/or chapters that should be mentioned by the editor or the one in charge.Thankd
The "Reject and Resubmit" editor's decision has both positive and negative sides to it. It may be taken as a positive decision since it can be interpreted that the editor wanted to give the paper a chance. But it is also a negative decision since, as has already been mentioned in the comments by several RG members, it is harsh and inconsiderate. I would never re-submit my paper to that journal. Adios!
It means there are some merits in your previous submission. Hence it can benefit from revision using the reviewers' comments to improve the manuscript.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Education
- Higher Education
- Academic Writing