1ST BLOG FROM TAIWAN: This blog is being posted from Taipei. Time-wise, they're a bit ahead of Eastern U.S. time. In fact, it's almost Christmas here. The lights are going up as I type. Haha. After a 27-hr flight, I'm slightly punchy. Anyway, it's blog time. Back to rejection!
TWO TYPES OF REJECTION DECISIONS
If the editor’s decision is: “the manuscript is inappropriate for the journal,” which may occur before the review process, he or she may suggest other journals that are more appropriate. This decision usually occurs very quickly. Over the past 6 months, I’ve received those rejections within 24 hours of submission thanks to the miracle of “electronic rejection.”
If the manuscript is sent out for review, the editor may decide: "rejected without the option to resubmit." In this case, a thoughtful editor or reviewer may also suggest other journals if they find merit in the paper and expect you will revise it.
A VISIT TO TOTAL REJECTION-LAND!
Now what do you do? You have a manuscript that’s been whacked as inappropriate or with buckets of changes to be made.
You have several choices available. Pick one of the following:
A. Send the manuscript to your recycle bin
B. Send out the manuscript to a “more appropriate” journal without any changes
C. Revise the manuscript based on the editor’s and/or reviewers’ feedback and then send it out to another journal
D. Put it on the backburner and refocus on a different manuscript
E. Refill your prescription meds quickly
F. All of the above
Most frequently, I will choose “B” or “C,” depending on the manuscript, and “E.” (A little pharmaceutical humor.) On only one occasion did I elect “D,” to rewrite a manuscript a year later after rejection and do not resubmit. It was finally published.
CONSIDER REVISION
If you can correct the flaws that one set of reviewers found, you’ll be one up on the next band of reviewers from the next journal. Unless the comments were totally inappropriate or unfounded, think about them carefully and decide which ones suggest the need for legitimate changes. Then make them.
If you don’t try to improve the quality of your manuscript before submitting elsewhere, you may end up with many of the same criticisms and rejection again. You’re back at square one. You haven’t progressed and the manuscript is still inadequate for publication. Use all of the FREE feedback you get from editors and reviewers. Their comments on the quality of your work will improve your writing and the meaningfulness of your contributions.
COPYRIGHT © 2010 Ronald A. Berk, LLC
AUTOPSY THE COMMENTS
Make a “WHY” incision and dissect each comment systematically. Decide whether you are willing to complete the change or, if the comment is inappropriate or a misinterpretation of your writing, address the comment in your cover letter. Argue your case respectfully for why you didn’t make the change. Be clear in your justification; otherwise the reviewer may challenge you again.
It is critical that you address every comment by the editor and the reviewers. Make sure you itemize the comments in your letter and indicate whether you made the changes or explain why you didn’t. That covers you and insures your integrity in the process. You’re playing by the rules. The editors should also play by those same rules. Most of the time, they do.
BAD EXPERIENCE ALERT: One time during all of my submission, I received 2 out of 3 reviewers’ comments and the editor’s request to make specific changes. As I was completing the revision, I received the 3rd reviewer’s comments in the mail (back in the days of pony express), which obviously were sent in late, asking for a major revision. Is that playing fair? You be the judge. I called the editor and negotiated the changes I was willing to make. Sometimes you can get blind-sided by the blind-review process.If you were the editor, what would you have done with a late review?
SUBMIT LETTER WITH REVISION
Submit your MAJOR revision with your detailed cover letter addressing the editor’s and reviewers’ comments. When your revision is submitted, the editor will usually send it back to the same reviewers, unless they have previously indicated they don’t want to review the revision. Editors provide that professional courtesy to reviewers.
What happens to that revision? The editor either accepts it as is OR, (I know you don’t want to read the rest of this sentence, so close your eyes until you’re ready) sends it back to you for another revision. That possibility was covered in the previous blog that you skipped. Check it out.
If you plan on submitting your manuscript to another journal, should you make any revisions at all, or just submit? Why should you put yourself through that pain? The next editor doesn’t know where your manuscript has traveled on its publication journey, much less how many times it’s been whacked. Check out my next blog as your options unfold. Don’t hold your mouse so tightly. Relax.
COPYRIGHT © 2010 Ronald A. Berk, LLC
KEEP YOUR EYE ON THE PRIZE
After you’ve read the comments and recovered emotionally from their impact (maybe put the manuscript aside for a couple of days, but not years), try to examine each comment objectively and assess what changes are required. I can say almost unequivocally that all of my revised manuscripts were better than the originals. After all, that’s really what counts. The process usually works successfully to yield an improved final article.
Someone once said a long time ago: “Forget what is behind and strain toward what is ahead. Press on toward the goal in winning the prize.” Keep your eye on the prize—that “new & improved” end product in mind. The wounds will heal and there will be understated elation when the article finally “hits the streets” or cyberspace for e-journals. It’s definitely worth the experience, plus you have another pub notch in your CV list.
DOES REVISION IMPROVE YOUR CHANCES OF PUBLICATION?
For the journal editor who requested minor revisions or rejected your manuscript, but is willing to reconsider after a major revision, your chances are very high it will be published. That decision is contingent on the quality of your revision and the extent to which you have successfully addressed all of the reviewers’ comments.
There is built-in accountability in the review process. Typically, the revised manuscript will be sent to those same reviewers. They must approve your changes based on their original comments. However, keep in mind that they may not be totally satisfied with all changes. They could request another revision. Hold on to your keyboard. The peer-review plot thickens.
CAN YOU BE REQUESTED TO REVISE YOUR REVISION?
You bet! Those reviewers may require another round of revisions. Two or three rounds are not uncommon for the most prestigious journals. Their editorial boards and reviewers are very demanding. That’s why publishing in those journals matters when you come up for promotion. Just stay with it, hunker down, and address all of their concerns on each iteration. Hopefully, your manuscript will be getting better and better. At least, theoretically, that should be the by-product of this process.
Hopefully, your revised revision will finally yield an acceptance verdict by the editor.
In your revision decision process, what should you do if you disagree with the editor’s and/or reviewers’ comments? What are your options? How should those comments be addressed? Stay tuned. The answers are coming up next.
COPYRIGHT © 2010 Ronald A. Berk, LLC
