Recently I have submitted one manuscript to RSC Advances. Within one week the status of my manuscript was in peer review (one reviewer agreed to review). But after about twenty days the manuscript status changed to with editor. This status again moved back to peer review in two days. I am confused. Why the manuscript is sent back for peer review again? Whether the Editor called additional reviewer or something else? If so why additional reviewer is called !
Calling another reviewer in some cases such are:
1. One of the reviewers is not ready to make a review for the manuscript at this time.
2. The scope of the manuscript out of the reviewer's interesting.
3. The answers of the reviewers 50% to accept and 50% to reject. Therefore, the editor needs to add another reviewer in order to make a decision about the manuscript.
Ask the Editor straight way or wail for some more time. One week is not sufficient for review, especially for lengthy MSS
Maybe the editor-in-chief consulted one of the associate editors before sending the manuscript for external reviewers, this happens very often you don't need to worry.
Dear Harekrushna Sutar after such a relatively short time you should not worry too much. It happens quite often that reviewers decline to perform the review for various reasons. RSC journals often ask 3 or even 4 reviewers.
Usually an editor wants at least two reviews. In case of contradictory results of the review process, usally at least another reviewer is asked for his opinion.
Harekrushna Sutar
Dear Researcher,
Reviewing is a very time consuming job. Many a times I have seen a reviewer takes a month to review an article. So you have mentioned that the time in your case is only 20 days. In this case, I would request you to please wait for a few more days. However, I would also like to echo what has been said by Subir Bandyopadhyay . You can talk to the journal editor about the problem that arose regarding peer review. But don't think that this is very serious. As Frank T. Edelmann said it is quite often that reviewers decline the offer to review.
Wishing you all the best with your publication.
Thank you.
Best regards,
Anamitra.
If the editor is not satisfied on the review reports received, he will call for additional reviews.
Dear Harekrushna Sutar I think that Fred Sinowatz mentioned a good point. It frequently happens that a manuscript receives contradictory treports from the reviewers (e.g. one "minor revision" and one "reject"). In such cases, the Editors often ask a third reviewer to act as an adjudicative reviewer.
If there is some unusual pattern in the reviewer reports comes to editors notice, there is required to go for the additional third party opinion.
Harekrushna Sutar Frank T. Edelmann Isaac Dinaharan Anamitra Roy Fred Sinowatz Sanaa N Al- Haj Ali Subir Bandyopadhyay
Calling another reviewer in some cases such are:
1. One of the reviewers is not ready to make a review for the manuscript at this time.
2. The scope of the manuscript out of the reviewer's interesting.
3. The answers of the reviewers 50% to accept and 50% to reject. Therefore, the editor needs to add another reviewer in order to make a decision about the manuscript.
An editor usually can calls for additional reviewers whenever there are contradictory reports on the submitted publication or biased reports or when there is a clear conflict of interest by some reviewers who spontaneously refuse to act as referee.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Philology
- Classical Philology
- Manuscripts