Our recent article submitted to a leading Elsevier journal resulted in reject decision. Three of the reviewers' out of four recommended the article after major revision, while one reviewer simply wrote 'reject due to no innovation'. In this case, what could be the review reports of the three reviewers who have recommended for acceptance after revision? Is it scientifically right?
Dear colleague, this is an interesting question. My experience is that as an editor you also read the article yourself. and even if I am not a specialist in a particular field, it is possible assess the general quality of a paper together with the input from the reviewers. It is therefore possible that even with some positive reviews, the editor decides differently based on his/her own assessment and the support of some other reviews (unfortunately reviewers almost never agree with each other ;-). Of course, just one sentence to reject a paper is insufficient as a proper review, and I think it is legitimate to ask the editor for further legitimation and tips. In the end, as a research community we want to learn from each other and enable each other to improve our research. I wouldn't feel that you ask too much ..Hope this helps
.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Social Science
- Media
- Journalism