How to write and publish a scientific paper - Barbara Gastel, Robert A. Day 2022

The editor’s decision
The review process (How to deal with editors)
Publishing the paper

Sometimes the editor’s decision is easy. If all reviewers advise “accept” with no or only slight revision, and they all state solid reasons for their recommendation, the editor has no problem. Ditto if there’s a unanimous and persuasive recommendation to reject the paper. Unfortunately, there are many instances in which the opinions of the reviewers are contradictory or unaccompanied by strong evidence. In such cases, the editor must either make the final decision or send the manuscript to one or more additional reviewers. Editors are likely to take the first approach if they are reasonably expert in the subject area of the manuscript and can thus serve as additional reviewers. At journals with many more submissions than they can publish, even papers receiving all “accepts” may be rejected if strong arguments cannot be mustered for their inclusion (much like when a grant application is “approved but not funded”).

The review process being completed, and the editor having made a decision, the author is now notified of the editor’s decision. And it is the editor’s decision. Editorial board members and ad hoc reviewers can only recommend; the final decision is and must be the editor’s. This is especially true for those journals (the majority) that use anonymous reviewers. The decisions will be presented to the authors as though they were the editor’s own, and indeed they are.

The editor’s decision will be one of three general types, commonly expressed in one word: accept, reject, or modify. Commonly, one of these three decisions will be reached within 4 to 6 weeks after submission of the manuscript. If you are not advised of the editor’s decision within 8 weeks, or provided with an explanation for the delay, do not be afraid to contact the journal. You have the right to expect a decision, or at least a report, within a reasonable length of time; also, your inquiry might bring to light a problem. Perhaps the editor’s decision was made, but notification did not reach you. If the delay was caused within the editor’s office (usually by lack of response from one of the reviewers), your inquiry is likely to trigger an effort to resolve the problem, whatever it is.

Besides, you should never be afraid to contact editors. With rare exceptions, editors are very nice people. Never consider them adversaries. They are on your side. Their only goal is to publish good science in understandable language. If that is not also your goal, you will indeed be dealing with a deadly adversary; however, if you share the same goal, you will find the editor to be a resolute ally. You are likely to receive advice and guidance that you could not possibly buy at any price.