What Should I Do If My Paper's Status Changes Without Notification?

  • Context: Other 
  • Thread starter Thread starter yihg500k7
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Paper
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the experience of a participant whose paper was submitted to Physical Review Letters and subsequently faced an unexpected status change without notification. The conversation explores the implications of this situation, including the participant's concerns about the editor's comments and the lack of communication from the journal.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes their experience with a paper submission, noting that their manuscript was rejected and that they found the editor's comments incorrect.
  • Another participant suggests researching how to handle scientific journal rejections, citing various reasons why papers may be rejected.
  • Some participants argue that the original poster (OP) should consider the possibility that their paper may not meet the standards of PRL, emphasizing the importance of relevance and quality.
  • There are claims that the OP's response to the editor may have contributed to the rejection of their paper.
  • Several participants express skepticism about the OP's understanding of the submission process and the standards expected by journals like PRL.
  • One participant suggests that the OP should submit their paper to another journal, indicating that there may be no recourse with PRL.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the reasons for the paper's rejection and the appropriateness of the OP's response to the editor. There is no consensus on whether the editor acted correctly or whether the OP's manuscript was valid.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the importance of understanding the submission process and the standards of academic journals, suggesting that the OP may lack experience in this area. There are also references to the subjective nature of editorial decisions and the potential for miscommunication.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for authors navigating the manuscript submission process, particularly those facing rejection or communication issues with academic journals.

yihg500k7
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
Who can help me? My paper was submitted to Physical Review Letters in October 25, 2018. But the paper first rejected by Associate Editor of PRL in October 30, 2018, and he gave me a few comments on my manuscript. But I found that his comments were incorrect, so I resubmitted my manuscript to PRL in November 10, 2018 and responded to his comments. I find that my manuscript status has always been "With editors" from Monday to Thursday(From November 12, 2018 to November 15, 2018), and the manuscript submission system has this record: Ed. decision and / or Ref. comments to author; response rcvd, but Friday(November 16, 2018) my manuscript status was " Not under active consideration", and the record also disappeared in the manuscript submission system, and I did not receive any decision notification email from the editor.I contacted the Associate Editor of PRL, but the Associate Editor didn't give me any response. It is certain that the record are deleted by the Associate Editor. Because my response to his comments contained these words:”You make these comments only based on your own subjective assumptions without any evidence, the comments are unconvincing. So your comments are not valid.” He may not be happy to read these words. But these are facts.The Associate Editor has broken the rules. Please kindly tell me what I should do now.Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
My suggestion is to read up on it online:

by searching the terms: "how to handle a scientific journal rejection"

https://www.google.com/search?q=how...ome..69i57.10567j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

I found quite a few references of others who have been rejected and how they handled the situation.

In one case, the author became an editor and realized how many papers often get rejected for one reason or another.

I've also read a book written by a book reviewer who said manuscripts were routinely rejected because of the paper they were written on or the spelling or poor English within the first 5 pages of text...

https://www.dailywritingtips.com/the-first-five-pages/

Because reviewers get so many papers they try to find reasons to reject in order to find those few papers that are really outstanding and they aren't interested in helping you to get your paper published unless they see something extremely special in it or unless they get very few papers that journal cycle.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters
jedishrfu said:
My suggestion is to read up on it online:

by searching the terms: "how to handle a scientific journal rejection"

https://www.google.com/search?q=how...ome..69i57.10567j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

I found quite a few references of others who have been rejected and how they handled the situation.

In one case, the author became an editor and realized how many papers often get rejected for one reason or another.

I've also read a book written by a book reviewer who said manuscripts were routinely rejected because of the paper they were written on or the spelling or poor English within the first 5 pages of text...

https://www.dailywritingtips.com/the-first-five-pages/

Because reviewers get so many papers they try to find reasons to reject in order to find those few papers that are really outstanding and they aren't interested in helping you to get your paper published unless they see something extremely special in it or unless they get very few papers that journal cycle.

Give an irrelevant answer!

Please carefully read the content of my thread, and then reply, OK?
 
The most likely reason your paper is rejected like this is that it is irrelevant or wrong and the editors realize this. You need to be open to this possibility which, judging by the tone of your OP and your response to @jedishrfu , you are not. For PRL you have even higher standards than most other journals. Your manuscript needs to be relevant not only to the field but also to a broader audience.

The editors have absolutely not broken any rules. It is not a right to get your manuscripts published in PRL.

What academic training do you have? Do you have a PhD or working on one? In that case your supervisor can advice you on the quality of your research and your manuscript. If not how do you know that your paper is relevant?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters and jedishrfu
yihg500k7 said:
Give an irrelevant answer!

Please carefully read the content of my thread, and then reply, OK?
If this is your reaction to @jedishrfu trying to be helpful, I can understand why your reply to the editor might have caused your article to be discarded by PRL.

There is basically nothing you can do with respect to PRL. You can try another journal, but before doing that I would take @Orodruin's advice and consider whether there is a problem with the paper itself.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Wrichik Basu, NTL2009, russ_watters and 1 other person
From the contents of the above replies, You seem to have no experience in submission.I do not want to communicate with you, I want to delete the post.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jedishrfu
yihg500k7 said:
The Associate Editor has broken the rules.

Broken the rules? Oh noes!

Uh...which rules exactly?

yihg500k7 said:
Please kindly tell me what I should do now.Thank you.

Submit to another journal.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jedishrfu
yihg500k7 said:
From the contents of the above replies, You seem to have no experience in submission.I do not want to communicate with you, I want to delete the post.

Based on your reaction here, I can already guess why your submission was rejected by the editor.

Many of us here not only have plenty of experience in journal submissions, but we are also referees for PRL and other journals. In my case, I’ve also had the opportunity to talk to many of the Physical Review editors at the various March Meetings.

So if you’ve never consider the possibility of you being completely wrong, this is one where you definitely are!

Zz.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davenn, russ_watters and jedishrfu
yihg500k7 said:
From the contents of the above replies, You seem to have no experience in submission.I do not want to communicate with you, I want to delete the post.
You just made it blatantly clear that you have no idea what you are talking about. If this is the amount of effort you put into considering whether or not your manuscript is a valid and meaningful contribution to the scientific endeavour, then it is not very surprising that it is not accepted by PRL.

I have co-authored more than 50 publications in top tier journals in high-energy physics and I have refereed manuscripts for most of the journals in the field - including PRL. It is clear from your attitude and your replies that you yourself has no experience with or idea about how scientific publishing works. Why are you asking questions that you are not prepared to hear the answer to?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davenn, mfb, russ_watters and 2 others
  • #10
There is no point in continuing this discussion.

Thread closed.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: NTL2009, Borg, davenn and 1 other person

Similar threads

Other In which cases could the Physics Letters B change reviewers?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Is Self-Publication the Solution for a Rejected Paper?
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
Other Doing my PhD in a multidisciplinary project -- I need advice please
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
News Patriot Act 2: Summarized by Alex Jones
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K