i. Although the suggested correction was very less raised by the 2 reviewers in their 2nd revision, why does the editor asked for major revision?
ii. Why does the editor has given me clues to solve each of the raised questions? Does it mean the learned editor is going to accepting my paper after updating the manuscript based on given suggestions by the reviewers?
My major is management accounting, good coorporate governance, csr and public sector .
sometimes the editor found differences in reviewors opinions so, he needs to onother reviewors
This happens quite frequently as the editor has to maintain the quality standard of the Journal. There is a high probability for your paper to get published if you simultaneously address the issues raised by both reviewers and the editor.
It is ego-deflating to receive such news. However, if you ardently address the concerns of the reviewer and editor in a professional way, your publication has a good chance of being accepted. The reviewer may be giving you clues because s/he knows at least part of what it might take to make this a better publication, but ultimately, this is your authorship, so you must do the work. Please understand that while the editor is not on your side per se, the editor is on the side of attracting the best publications to their journal. You are likely on the side of having the best article for citations, etc. in the long run. That is, you both benefit from your writing the best possible article for publication. So, see this as an editor working with you to help get that done, and eagerly work with your co-authors and that editor to get this done. It's a win for you both.
This link maybe useful for you :
https://www.quora.com/Can-a-paper-get-rejected-after-a-major-revision
For betterment of the paper, might be editor have noticed that more seriously.
Acceptance of the paper, positively yes.
Follow This Link please:
https://www.editage.com/insights/behind-the-scenes-how-a-journal-editor-reaches-a-decision-on-a-manuscript-after-peer-review
If the editor is asking for major revision and ask you to submit the revised manuscripts, it implies the paper is considered acceptable if he author can validly address all the questions raised by the reviewers of the manuscripts.
Editor may actually call for major revision if the revision requires collecting more data or repeating the analysis because of some obvious errors.
Thank you for your detail explanation, but i want to know what is the difference between other editor and handling editor and what are the responsibility of handling editor. Valrie Chambers
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Philology
- Classical Philology
- Manuscripts