Review and Revise for Resubmission

• Option: Authors can carefully address the reviewers’ feedback and resubmit their manuscript to the same journal, especially if the rejection is classified as a “revise and resubmit” or “conditional rejection.”
• Consideration: If the reviewers’ feedback is constructive, revising the manuscript to address the concerns may increase the chances of acceptance upon resubmission. Be sure to follow the journal’s guidelines on how to resubmit revised manuscripts.

Submit to Another Journal

• Option: Authors can submit their manuscript to a different journal, particularly if the rejection was outright and final.
• Consideration: It’s crucial to select an appropriate new journal by considering the manuscript’s scope, audience, impact factor, and the reason for the original rejection. Lower-impact or more specialised journals may be suitable if a manuscript was rejected from a top-tier publication.

Appeal the Rejection

• Option: Some journals allow authors to appeal a rejection decision.
• Consideration: If the authors feel the rejection was unjust or based on a misunderstanding, they can write a formal appeal to the journal editor. The success rate of appeals is typically low, so this option should only be considered if there is strong evidence that the reviewers overlooked key points or made factual errors.

Preprint Servers

• Option: Authors can post their rejected manuscript on a preprint server (such as arXiv, bioRxiv, or medRxiv) to share their work with the scientific community while they prepare to submit it elsewhere
• Consideration: Preprints allow authors to receive feedback from the wider community and establish precedence for their research. Many journals allow submission of manuscripts that have already appeared as preprints, though authors should check the policies of their target journal.

Rework the Manuscript for a New Audience

• Option: If the feedback points to significant issues with scope or audience, authors might consider reworking the manuscript to target a different type of journal or field.
• Consideration: This may involve adjusting the paper’s emphasis, rewriting sections to appeal to a different audience, or reframing the research question to align with the new target journal’s scope.

Cope with the Emotional Impact

• Option: Handling rejection with resilience is important. Authors should take time to reflect and objectively analyse the feedback instead of reacting emotionally.
• Consideration: Rejection is a common part of the academic publication process, and it doesn’t necessarily reflect the quality of the research. Many prominent papers were rejected multiple times before being published.

Collaborate or Seek Mentorship

• Option: Authors can seek feedback from colleagues or mentors who are more experienced in publishing.
• Consideration: Having a fresh set of eyes can provide valuable insights into areas for improvement and suggestions on how to better target the right journal.

Co-Submit or Cascade Submissions (If Applicable)

• Option: Some publishers offer cascade submission options, where a rejected manuscript is automatically considered by a lower-tier journal within the same publishing group.
• Consideration: This can save time in the resubmission process, as it allows the manuscript to be submitted to another journal without the need for a full reformat or re-review.

Seek Help from Professional Editors

• Option: Authors can hire professional scientific editors or publication consultants to improve the manuscript’s clarity, organisation, and presentation.
• Consideration: This is especially useful for non-native English speakers or if the reviewers pointed out issues with language or structure.

Discuss feedback with your co-authors (if applicable) and decide on your next steps. Getting past the journal’s editorial gatekeeper can be a lottery and most papers are rejected outright, never getting sent out for peer review. Therefore, if you have received comments from referees it is worth considering whether you should
stick with your original choice of journal as you already have a foot in the door. When resubmitting to the same journal review carefully the wording of the Editor’s letter; often its language indicates whether they feel that you should revise and resubmit or submit elsewhere.

If an editor offers the opportunity to resubmit, careful consideration should be given as to whether you can make all the required changes (e.g., you may not want to add more experiments to your paper before seeing it in print), your argument or methodology may be fatally flawed or you may not have the budget or opportunity to address requests for additional work. You’ll have to work that out for yourself but our schematic might help you decide.

If your article was rejected because the editors or referees judged it unsuitable or not novel enough for their journal, you may want to submit it intact without revision to an alternative journal. However, ensure that you adapt your manuscript in light of the comments made by your peers (as points raised by previous referees may come up again) and review the content to ensure it fits with the alternative journal’s style. If you receive an outright rejection you could consider a rebuttal if you think an editor or referee misunderstood your methodology or arguments; only consider this if you can build a compelling case.

Key Takeaways:

• Don’t take it personally: Scientific rejection is a normal part of the publication process.
• Act on feedback: Carefully review feedback to improve the manuscript.
• Consider other journals: Be strategic about selecting an alternative journal if the paper is rejected outright.
• Seek advice: Colleagues, mentors, or professional services can provide helpful input for revisions and resubmissions.

1. An Insider’s Insight into Handling Rejection. Niche Science & Technology Ltd., 2015