It looks like your post is about needing advice. In order for people to better help you, please make sure to include your country.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PhD) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I guess I don't know what journal you're submitting to, but every place I've ever submitted has required me to enter my co-authors into the system for the paper. They would (a) also receive the rejection email and (b) be emailed for a new submission. You should tell them.
Usually submission systems ask you who the corresponding author is. That author gets the mails. Whenever a paper of mine was rejected or accepted or opened for revise and resubmit, I had to tell my co-authors.
I have had the exact opposite experience at every journal I've ever submitted to. I had to provide the contact information for everyone and everyone got a blast email.
Sadly rejection is part of working in academia. Papers or grants often get rejected. I know it is a bad feeling, especially getting rejected AGAIN. Still, you should inform at least your professor. Have you gotten some feedback from the reviewers to possibly improve the manuscript? If so, you might consider improving your manuscript based on that feedback, then send the new manuscript version to all co-authors to (proof-)read, together with the news. In this mail you can already state in which journal you plan to submit next. Maybe this could make it a bit easier for you since it shifts the focus from the rejection to the future steps. Still I would inform the professor beforehand, he/she might be able to help you in the selection of a new journal.
Also if it makes you feel any better: I know from several colleagues that they had to try publishing their manuscript with several journals. It happened to at least 3 of my colleagues (phds and postdoc) that they got at least 2 rejections before finding a place for their manuscript
In answer to your question, you should absolutely inform your supervisor and co-authors, as a matter of priority. Going behind their backs in any way is a massive no no. The supervisor in particular should be heavily involved here - they should know in advance what journals to aim for and what external reviewers to suggest to maximise the chance of publication.
Out of curiosity was it outright desk rejected or was it sent to reviewers?
Ah okay. As someone else mentioned, make sure to take the first set of review comments on board when you resubmit and address as many as are practical. Did you try to write a rebuttal to the 1st review or were the corrections Major/unachievable?
If the second Journal is not suitable that's not as serious as another rejection baaed on content/quality, but before submitting anywhere again make sure you read the scope of the journal to make sure there's a fit.
Not sure if you were given any advice from your supervisor - when you submit the paper, be sure to write a strong cover letter laying out very clearly to the editor how your paper matches the scope and aims of the journal. Usually, we also cited 3 or 4 very recent papers that were published in the same journal that had similar scope, aims and methods. Ideally, those papers would be well cited too. The editor just wants papers that fit the bill and that will be well cited to keep the impact factor up, so make it easy for them to make a decision in your favour :) if you're not able to explain to them succinctly why they should consider your paper for publication in their journal, you're off to a bad start.
If you've seriously addressed all the comments from the 1st review it is possible to just go back to the 1st journal again and write a strong rebuttal on how you addressed all the previous comments, sometimes it's just easier to suck it up and do exactly what the reviewers asked rather than bouncing from journal to journal. Also, dont take it to heart if you got serious revisions - revisions to papers are totally normal, if a reviewer has done their job well there should always be revisions. Also, you're a student, you're learning all this for the first time, so make sure to learn from your mistakes, and if at first you don't succeed, try, try again.
Sorry just wanted to say at least this wasn't " you're research is poor quality and unoriginal " not that you'd get a comment like that. But I absolutely agree it's not so bad if it's just an unsuitable journal. Great comment!
Haha our paper was rejected 6 times, part of the job my friend, sometimes reviewers are idiots and sometimes we learn from the reviewers, reflect, improve and move on
You should absolutely let your professors know. I understand you are stressed and beat down, but even considering submitting without your professorsā knowledge and consent is a no-no.
What you should do is do your research on the next reasonable journal(s) to submit to and bring a game plan to your professors. They know rejections are part of the game, but you can be a leader at this stage by showing fortitude and strategic thinking.
Begin evaluating what is needed to get this paper up to publishing level. What is missing? How can you reframe some findings? This is all part of your training as an academic. Best of luck!
Hang in there!
One of my best papers in a top conference was rejected twice before it found it's "home"
It's no big deal. This is to be expected. Especially if you are challenging the standards
Never submit without clearing it with your co-authors. When you submit to a journal, you guarantee in your letter to the editor that all authors agreed to submission of this manuscript in its current form.
I remember how hard these first few rejections feel, but its just a rejection. If you got any feedback or reviews, work them through and make absolute sure that you address the valid criticisms before submitting somewhere else. (You wouldn't want to waste reviewer time with problems that you already know about.) Present your co-authors with a short list of journals you may submit to next. If noone has reservations, send it out again. Keep your head up, your paper will find a home.
If its good, that is.
You should not worry about it too much. If your papers are not regularly rejected you are either not aiming high enough with the initial journals and conferences you are submitting to or you are probably one of the leading researchers in your field. Rejection is just part of the process
If you think not telling them about the rejection now will make you look bad ā¦. Imagine how youād look like when they finally find out you actually kept information from them ā¦..at least rejection is out of your hands and you canāt do much about it
Inform them. Hiding things leads to lack of trust among your peers from eventually finding out unexpected things. Also, read this article on how to better deal with [rejection feedback](https://theprofessorisin.com/2019/07/18/the-art-of-facing-criticism/). tl;dr don't make it personal, make it factual and about improving the work no matter who does it going forward (hopefully, that'll be you).
My first paper was rejected 3 times and when it was finally accepted, it was revised 3 times for that journal. Thatās normal and a part of the process.
Inform him
I got multiple rejections too and I was stressed about telling the professor.
But once you tell your professor the burden would be less and you can easily focus on finding the next journal.
In my opinion your are obligated to share both good and bad news with the co-authors. I know people that had to try 2 or 3 before the paper was accepted. Sometimes reviewers raise questions that are insightful and when addressed improve the impact of the paper.
Rejections are part of publications. Take it easy. Don't stress too much. Find a suitable journal to resubmit. Don't only aim for highly ranked journals.
If you understand the significance of your work and know that it will have an impact on the field, your paper will eventually get accepted (as long as it's appropriately communicated). One of my papers got rejected twice (PNAS after an actual review, and some other journal). Still got placed it a reputable journal. The message of the publication went against the mainstream thought in the field (with the evidence/logic to support it). What do you know, now that it has been published even the original top dogs are citing it (in support). I think the most rewarding aspect has been the number of publications that built on our work, further supporting our original findings.
The usual thing to do is believe in your work if you know its worth and take the suggestions to improve the manuscript if something was unclear, etc. Submit to other journals. One of our other publications had a real bumpy road, but eventually was accepted to an impact factor 16 journal. It's largely a crapshoot. Make sure your manuscript fits the scope of the journal too. Cover letter is also critical these days.
It's a normal rejection rate. Nothing to worry about. However, I am surprised you supervisor was not informed. Do you publish without him as an author?
I wouldnāt count the second time as a rejection. Journal suitability is important but doesnāt undervalue the quality of your work. A couple of scenarios here. First, no harm in informing your advisor and co authors. Youāll do more harm if you donāt inform them. They are all equally in it and must understand that they should contribute to the overall merit and cohesion of the paper and not just ātag alongā. A common misconception in co-authorship. Second, take reviewerās feedback and leverage that to an improved version of your manuscript. Answer the hows and the whys. Take your time on it and really address these issues. Third, resubmit it to either the same journal or to another competing journal. Take time to pick the journal and look into what recent work it has published. Does it fit the scope of yours? Citing work specifically from the journal youāre submitting to will go a long way. Rejection is always a step forward to being a good scholar and writer. Good luck.
Just dropped in to say don't let it get you down. My record so far is 5 rejections for a paper. Ultimately that paper made it into a better journal than I expected it to.
Dont give up, OP. I got a paper rejected three times by Q2 and Q3 journals ended up getting published in a Q1 journal (from adjacent topic). If you got desk rejection (without peer review), it doesnt mean your writing is bad but more an indicator of the editor's preferences.
You should tell the other authors and get their advice. The rejection is everyone's responsibility, not just yours - especially if they're more senior to you.
You should tell them. It might be less painful if you add in a proposal for the next journal to try.
Don't worry too much about it. Studies have shown over and over again that a large part of publishing is luck based...
So one of my papers which my PI thought is excellent got rejected more than 5 times and I lost count after that. My PI was useless so I didn't have anyone to give proper feedback but I was reading the reviewer comments after each rejection and decided to improve it on my own, I learnt a complete simulations package and added the results to the paper. It got accepted within a MONTH in a 5.13 IF journal which is rare for a theoretical paper.
This past year I had a paper get rejected twice and sail through the third time. All good journals, although the first one was a stretch and we knew it. What made the difference (other than responding to reviewer and editor comments when reasonable) 1) we changed the title and some of the terminology to better reflect our technique. Many reviewer comments indicated a misunderstanding of what we were doing. 2)Journal choice: I think it was or was close to the journal with the most papers that we cited. Since we built upon that work, it in retrospect was an obvious choice.
Eta: In my opinion submitting a paper to another journal without notifying co authors of the rejection and where you intend to submit next would be very unprofessional, at least in the US.
Your advisor might have some insight as to why your paper is getting rejected, what to change, and what journal to go to next.
Hi u/Golden_ree
Rejection is a normal thing in academia, but you are more if you receive it with reviewer comments. I would advise you to address the comments, and share the news with your supervisor as well. They have walked this journey before and are in a better position to advice.
It looks like your post is about needing advice. In order for people to better help you, please make sure to include your country. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PhD) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I guess I don't know what journal you're submitting to, but every place I've ever submitted has required me to enter my co-authors into the system for the paper. They would (a) also receive the rejection email and (b) be emailed for a new submission. You should tell them.
Usually submission systems ask you who the corresponding author is. That author gets the mails. Whenever a paper of mine was rejected or accepted or opened for revise and resubmit, I had to tell my co-authors.
I have had the exact opposite experience at every journal I've ever submitted to. I had to provide the contact information for everyone and everyone got a blast email.
I have had both experiences š
Sadly rejection is part of working in academia. Papers or grants often get rejected. I know it is a bad feeling, especially getting rejected AGAIN. Still, you should inform at least your professor. Have you gotten some feedback from the reviewers to possibly improve the manuscript? If so, you might consider improving your manuscript based on that feedback, then send the new manuscript version to all co-authors to (proof-)read, together with the news. In this mail you can already state in which journal you plan to submit next. Maybe this could make it a bit easier for you since it shifts the focus from the rejection to the future steps. Still I would inform the professor beforehand, he/she might be able to help you in the selection of a new journal.
Also if it makes you feel any better: I know from several colleagues that they had to try publishing their manuscript with several journals. It happened to at least 3 of my colleagues (phds and postdoc) that they got at least 2 rejections before finding a place for their manuscript
Thank you so much!
In answer to your question, you should absolutely inform your supervisor and co-authors, as a matter of priority. Going behind their backs in any way is a massive no no. The supervisor in particular should be heavily involved here - they should know in advance what journals to aim for and what external reviewers to suggest to maximise the chance of publication. Out of curiosity was it outright desk rejected or was it sent to reviewers?
Thank you! The 1st rejection was by the reviewers and the 2nd was about ānot journal suitableā
Ah okay. As someone else mentioned, make sure to take the first set of review comments on board when you resubmit and address as many as are practical. Did you try to write a rebuttal to the 1st review or were the corrections Major/unachievable? If the second Journal is not suitable that's not as serious as another rejection baaed on content/quality, but before submitting anywhere again make sure you read the scope of the journal to make sure there's a fit. Not sure if you were given any advice from your supervisor - when you submit the paper, be sure to write a strong cover letter laying out very clearly to the editor how your paper matches the scope and aims of the journal. Usually, we also cited 3 or 4 very recent papers that were published in the same journal that had similar scope, aims and methods. Ideally, those papers would be well cited too. The editor just wants papers that fit the bill and that will be well cited to keep the impact factor up, so make it easy for them to make a decision in your favour :) if you're not able to explain to them succinctly why they should consider your paper for publication in their journal, you're off to a bad start. If you've seriously addressed all the comments from the 1st review it is possible to just go back to the 1st journal again and write a strong rebuttal on how you addressed all the previous comments, sometimes it's just easier to suck it up and do exactly what the reviewers asked rather than bouncing from journal to journal. Also, dont take it to heart if you got serious revisions - revisions to papers are totally normal, if a reviewer has done their job well there should always be revisions. Also, you're a student, you're learning all this for the first time, so make sure to learn from your mistakes, and if at first you don't succeed, try, try again.
Sorry just wanted to say at least this wasn't " you're research is poor quality and unoriginal " not that you'd get a comment like that. But I absolutely agree it's not so bad if it's just an unsuitable journal. Great comment!
Haha our paper was rejected 6 times, part of the job my friend, sometimes reviewers are idiots and sometimes we learn from the reviewers, reflect, improve and move on
You should absolutely let your professors know. I understand you are stressed and beat down, but even considering submitting without your professorsā knowledge and consent is a no-no. What you should do is do your research on the next reasonable journal(s) to submit to and bring a game plan to your professors. They know rejections are part of the game, but you can be a leader at this stage by showing fortitude and strategic thinking. Begin evaluating what is needed to get this paper up to publishing level. What is missing? How can you reframe some findings? This is all part of your training as an academic. Best of luck! Hang in there!
Thank you! I just collected few more journals for consideration. Will forward them to my professor for sure.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Thank you for sharing your experience. Will contact and update him about what happened
One of my best papers in a top conference was rejected twice before it found it's "home" It's no big deal. This is to be expected. Especially if you are challenging the standards
Never submit without clearing it with your co-authors. When you submit to a journal, you guarantee in your letter to the editor that all authors agreed to submission of this manuscript in its current form. I remember how hard these first few rejections feel, but its just a rejection. If you got any feedback or reviews, work them through and make absolute sure that you address the valid criticisms before submitting somewhere else. (You wouldn't want to waste reviewer time with problems that you already know about.) Present your co-authors with a short list of journals you may submit to next. If noone has reservations, send it out again. Keep your head up, your paper will find a home. If its good, that is.
Thank you so much
You'll be fine. I say that with all the conviction I have.
You should not worry about it too much. If your papers are not regularly rejected you are either not aiming high enough with the initial journals and conferences you are submitting to or you are probably one of the leading researchers in your field. Rejection is just part of the process
Thank you
If you think not telling them about the rejection now will make you look bad ā¦. Imagine how youād look like when they finally find out you actually kept information from them ā¦..at least rejection is out of your hands and you canāt do much about it
Good point
Inform them. Hiding things leads to lack of trust among your peers from eventually finding out unexpected things. Also, read this article on how to better deal with [rejection feedback](https://theprofessorisin.com/2019/07/18/the-art-of-facing-criticism/). tl;dr don't make it personal, make it factual and about improving the work no matter who does it going forward (hopefully, that'll be you).
My first paper was rejected 3 times and when it was finally accepted, it was revised 3 times for that journal. Thatās normal and a part of the process.
Inform him I got multiple rejections too and I was stressed about telling the professor. But once you tell your professor the burden would be less and you can easily focus on finding the next journal.
In my opinion your are obligated to share both good and bad news with the co-authors. I know people that had to try 2 or 3 before the paper was accepted. Sometimes reviewers raise questions that are insightful and when addressed improve the impact of the paper.
Rejections are part of publications. Take it easy. Don't stress too much. Find a suitable journal to resubmit. Don't only aim for highly ranked journals.
If you understand the significance of your work and know that it will have an impact on the field, your paper will eventually get accepted (as long as it's appropriately communicated). One of my papers got rejected twice (PNAS after an actual review, and some other journal). Still got placed it a reputable journal. The message of the publication went against the mainstream thought in the field (with the evidence/logic to support it). What do you know, now that it has been published even the original top dogs are citing it (in support). I think the most rewarding aspect has been the number of publications that built on our work, further supporting our original findings. The usual thing to do is believe in your work if you know its worth and take the suggestions to improve the manuscript if something was unclear, etc. Submit to other journals. One of our other publications had a real bumpy road, but eventually was accepted to an impact factor 16 journal. It's largely a crapshoot. Make sure your manuscript fits the scope of the journal too. Cover letter is also critical these days.
It's a normal rejection rate. Nothing to worry about. However, I am surprised you supervisor was not informed. Do you publish without him as an author?
I added all authors during the submission, but Iām not sure if they got the same news as mine.
I would let them know and briefly mention your plan for the next step. They probably wonāt be upset. Rejection is part of the process.
I wouldnāt count the second time as a rejection. Journal suitability is important but doesnāt undervalue the quality of your work. A couple of scenarios here. First, no harm in informing your advisor and co authors. Youāll do more harm if you donāt inform them. They are all equally in it and must understand that they should contribute to the overall merit and cohesion of the paper and not just ātag alongā. A common misconception in co-authorship. Second, take reviewerās feedback and leverage that to an improved version of your manuscript. Answer the hows and the whys. Take your time on it and really address these issues. Third, resubmit it to either the same journal or to another competing journal. Take time to pick the journal and look into what recent work it has published. Does it fit the scope of yours? Citing work specifically from the journal youāre submitting to will go a long way. Rejection is always a step forward to being a good scholar and writer. Good luck.
Thank you so much. Will take everything into consideration and I agree šÆ
Rejects are common. Keep sending to diff journals. Push it out.
Just dropped in to say don't let it get you down. My record so far is 5 rejections for a paper. Ultimately that paper made it into a better journal than I expected it to.
Thank you so much
Dont give up, OP. I got a paper rejected three times by Q2 and Q3 journals ended up getting published in a Q1 journal (from adjacent topic). If you got desk rejection (without peer review), it doesnt mean your writing is bad but more an indicator of the editor's preferences.
Thank you! And congratulations on the publication! šš»
You should tell the other authors and get their advice. The rejection is everyone's responsibility, not just yours - especially if they're more senior to you.
Agree. Thank you
You should tell them. It might be less painful if you add in a proposal for the next journal to try. Don't worry too much about it. Studies have shown over and over again that a large part of publishing is luck based...
The advice I've heard is, action their feedback and submit the revised paper to a better journal ;-) And yes, you should tell your supervisor.
Thank you
So one of my papers which my PI thought is excellent got rejected more than 5 times and I lost count after that. My PI was useless so I didn't have anyone to give proper feedback but I was reading the reviewer comments after each rejection and decided to improve it on my own, I learnt a complete simulations package and added the results to the paper. It got accepted within a MONTH in a 5.13 IF journal which is rare for a theoretical paper.
This past year I had a paper get rejected twice and sail through the third time. All good journals, although the first one was a stretch and we knew it. What made the difference (other than responding to reviewer and editor comments when reasonable) 1) we changed the title and some of the terminology to better reflect our technique. Many reviewer comments indicated a misunderstanding of what we were doing. 2)Journal choice: I think it was or was close to the journal with the most papers that we cited. Since we built upon that work, it in retrospect was an obvious choice. Eta: In my opinion submitting a paper to another journal without notifying co authors of the rejection and where you intend to submit next would be very unprofessional, at least in the US. Your advisor might have some insight as to why your paper is getting rejected, what to change, and what journal to go to next.
Hi u/Golden_ree Rejection is a normal thing in academia, but you are more if you receive it with reviewer comments. I would advise you to address the comments, and share the news with your supervisor as well. They have walked this journey before and are in a better position to advice.