I recently had a paper declined by a journal because they were unable to find a reviewer. I was wondering about the journal's obligations at this point.
By accepting the paper for review, have they in essence entered into a contract with the author to provide a service? If they fail to provide that service what are the implications for the journal?
Adding to what Christopher Nock said. There is no contract until the journal finally accept your manuscript for publication. Identifying suitable reviewer is not easy. Consider your paper again and submit to a different journal.
No. They've accepted nothing until they've accepted it. IE once it's been reviewed, and they say yes on that basis. You can submit the paper for consideration, but they can't review it without the right reviewer! As such any contract begins once they say yes.
The lack of a reviewer suggests two possibilities: 1/ you've sent the paper to the wrong journal or 2/ it's a quality journal with a judicious editor. Ask them where they'd send it.
Christopher NOCK
Finding appropriate reviewer in not easy. That is why some journals request the authors to submit names of potential reviewers.
Adding to what Christopher Nock said. There is no contract until the journal finally accept your manuscript for publication. Identifying suitable reviewer is not easy. Consider your paper again and submit to a different journal.
No, because no "consideration" has changed hands. One has not "paid" the journal anything, thus there is no "quid pro quo," such that there is a duty to fulfill a promise predicated on payment, or in legal jargon, consideration. While that consideration does not have to be money, it has to be some kind of tangible, exchangeable thing of value. All one is doing when submitting a paper is importuning a journal to consider one's research. After all, many papers are rejected at the "get-go"; that is they are not even sent for review. If one objects to this, one ought to keep in mind that, e.g. economics journals often get what amount to political science papers. Should they be required to "review" these content-irrelevant papers? I don't think they must. I once had to reject a very good paper on a novel that had been sent to a television studies division. It was just too far afield from what the content of that division.
It's unethical to resubmit a paper that has already been sent to reviewers by a journal. It's some form of a contract because many journals would reauire that you duly sign this agreement before your paper is sent to reviewers.
Yes they are, when in this case the contract is seen as a PROCESS and not an EVENT.
As rightly established by my learned colleague, the contract is sealed at the stage at which tangible exchanges take place between the two partiies.
he
No,there is no such contract. Reviewing manuscript is a voluantry mission , so it is not easy to find suitable reviewer that have time to accept reviewing your paper.
Failure to find reviewers means that :
1- the journal is not suitable for your research
or
2- your research topic needs very specialized reviewers that are difficult to find and if found they have no time to review or simply refuse to.
3- the quality of your research is low that is why most reviewer decline invitation to review it
Yes. Every journal normally have a list of reviewers in their respective field of study. Once they accept to review meaning they have a potential reviewer on their list to review that paper. Some journals at first decision after a scan reading clearly indicate whether the paper is within their scope or not. So once they give such a decision, then it raises some questions about; their list of potential reviewers?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Education
- Higher Education
- Academic Writing