I would follow the reviewer's suggestions, if I agree with them, and re-submit. If the reviewer wants a major overhaul, maybe I will submit to other journals instead.

Rejected with comment? If the comments are valid, try to improve the MS and submit it to an another journal.

Rejection is a part of many important activities by the journal editor. It is the decision made by him on the basis of a number of comments made by esteemed peer-reviewers (mostly in a double blind way). Generally it may appear harsh to the author(s). But the good points are:

1. It helps the author to realize the weak points, faulty methodologies, wrong interpretations and poorly designed manuscript, if any.

2. If properly advised and commented, the author may re-design the whole work, part of work, or simply rewrite the manuscript to submit afresh to the same journal or to a separate one.

3. It always provides a new insight to the author as every rejection refines the thought process to re-focus and re-improvise from within.

4. From the next point onwards the author is supposed to develop the power to be extra cautious in each step and every stage of the research programme including analyzing data and developing the manuscript.

What is your advice after receiving rejected manuscript?

You can also refer to the following RG links: https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_you_react_after_your_manuscript_get_rejected

https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_do_you_handle_Journal_rejection

https://www.researchgate.net/post/In_your_opinion_experience_what_are_main_reasons_of_rejecting_a_manuscript_by_international_journal_reviewers

https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_are_the_most_popular_reasons_editors_usually_reject_your_paper_for

Improve the manuscript according to the reviewer's comments and then send it to another journal.

Improve the quality of the paper, but dont resubmit the paper in the same journal.

Don't get disheartened, there is always scope of acceptance in same or other journal after correction/ improvement and this will improve chances of acceptance next time

Work to enhance it based on the reviewer notes.

Liqaa

Receive it open mind, modify the manuscript appropriately and send to another. I always learn from peer review comments no matt the outcome.

You have to work on reviwers notes. Then send for another Journal.

First you seen the reviewers components and according to the reviewers changes the manuscript carefully and send back to another related Journal. Basically reviewers gives us the ways to improve yourself.

Modify the MS as par reviewers suggestions and submit to the Journal

Good review comments are always for improvement and rejection be taken in that spirit . Improve it and send again to same or better journal. Many times authors send purposefully for good review comments so that they can send it to another high rated journal after improvement.

make the necessary revisions to the paper.

search for the adequate journal in terms of scope, readership, research interests, editorial board... with the content of the paper.

add new related references for the journal to which the paper will be submitted.

A rejected manuscript should motivate a researcher to do more.

I think rejection is also a better way to improve our technical writing skills and to improve research paper. Just incorporate the suggestions and do the needful action. Again send it after adding the suggestions in a another journal. Sometimes, it depends on reviewers understanding too.

Try to modify paper according to reviewers comments. Otherwise send it to any other journal, if you fulfill the aims and objective of new identified journal.

I would suggest you to consider the comments and revise the paper as much as you can and submit it to another journal. I dont agree with re-submitting to the same journal, as they would have given you major corrections if they were really happy with that, good luck!

Hi Mohamad,

This is indeed a good question.

For me, I would see first the comments and apply them if they are logic. If the paper lacks major criteria to appear in a high-level journal (based on the comments, if they are from a high-level journal's reviewers), I would then submit to a lower level journal or just try to reconstruct it if not, I would go for a same-level one.

Thanks

Receipt of a rejected manuscript first destabilize mind, but in actual fact it helps build a better paper for subsequent submission. Again, not all rejections are justified. I have received a manuscript where the reviewers gave good commendation with advice to do minor revision, but the editor finalized by rejecting it on the ground of too many similar areas of study. In a simple term, not all rejections symbolize poor outcome, though the outcome often discourages further adjustment esp when one thinks of the stress it requires to remove and add, from the first page to the references in other to suit other journals.

Some Editors can do well in how they word rejection letters by stating clear reasons. Imagine what outright rejection does to a young researcher for no stated reason nor suggestions if the paper needs any improvement! The worst is when they acknowledge the quality of work is acceptable but yet reject without starting a reason! !

Sit down and go through the reviewers' comments and study where you have missed, refire.

Depends on the type of rejection. Editorial or after peer review. Editorial look for another journal but following peer reviews, have a second look at the article. Thanks

Nothing to bother about it. Modify the manuscript as per the comments sent by Editor and send it to another journal.

I agree with Michael Issigonis .

I suggest to revising according to reviewers and submitted in other journal.

The rejection letter should be read as carefully as instructions to cash in a winning lottery ticket. Never skim or read only the punch line (reject). It is surprising how many authors direct questions to me that have been explicitly answered in the rejection letter. It can be helpful for a colleague to read the letter if it appears confusing or unhelpful. As the number of submissions to journals rise—despite the exponential increase in the number of online and print journals more papers are rejected “internally” without external peer review. In this case, or more journal editors will review the paper to determine relevance for the journal audience, balance with recent or upcoming accepted papers, and overall quality. Papers that do not pass this initial filter will be rejected without further review. Journals differ in the amount of information that is provided to the authors regarding the reasons for rejection. Some clinical journals do not provide any additional information. Many medical education journals, including the Journal of Graduate Medical Education (JGME), will provide a short explanation. Review these comments carefully because they should provide helpful advice as to next steps.

Papers that pass this initial filter will be sent for peer review. Papers that are rejected after peer review usually have detailed comments about the strengths and weaknesses of the paper, as perceived by the reviewers. Editors may add additional summary comments that relate to the paper's relevance to the journal's audience, study validity, and overall importance in moving the field forward. This information is often extremely valuable for improving the paper or planning future projects. Before asking for additional feedback from the journal editors, digest these comments thoroughly.

Finally, the peer review process has flaws. Editors strive for fairness and weed out reviewers who deliver inappropriate or harsh comments. Studies, most focused on biomedical research, have determined various problems with the peer review system; yet, the system appears to be the best available at this time.

Thanks dear colleague @Abu-Hussein Muhamad for your enlightening comments !

Improve the manuscript on the basis of comment then communicate to other journal.

Simply follow reviwer's corrections and submit it in an other review. generally reviewers corrections are best perferct articles.

Go through the cause of rejection.

Incorporate required corrections.

Submit in some other journal

There are other journals. It will depend on the type of rejection.

Comments and suggestions are based on reviewers' opinion and thought. Those may be added or may not be depending upon the comments. But incorporate valuable and relevant suggestions. Do not get scared with rejection. It's a part of academician and researcher's career. May be a better Journal waiting for that research.