Communicating with journal Editor
It is crucial to develop and maintain a professional understanding with the editor. Although, it’s true that the author generally is hesitant to communicate in the context of the manuscript status. Clear professional discussion on the other hand can be the best way to restrict overthinking by the author and also gives a clear view regarding the fate of the manuscript.
Accepting the unexpected “Manuscript Rejection”
Although, manuscript rejection sets in a sense of failure, and for some time the author goes through a period of “trans” where the acceptance of manuscript rejection is deliberately denied or in some cases is not completely accepted. This is very much normal if its continues for a small period of time. However, a mind full reply to the editor is a must.
Steps to assimilate rejection and “Move on” by replying to the editor
- Although how depressing or heart-wrenching it may seem, making oneself prepared or the mere thought of writing back to editor post rejection is the 1st step to recovery.
- The author by deciding to write back to the editor makes up his mind to also read and re-read the loopholes of his work. The latter is the deciding act which in due course of time makes the researcher scholar an “Author”.
- Once the pitfall or gaps of the paper is ascertained, next crucial aspect is to frame right, affirmative, context-appropriate answers or viewpoint in a polite and elaborate manner to the editor.
- The author must gracefully accept the rejection and take the comments or query as the “stepping stone to success”.
Why replying to the editor is important to post rejection:
- It’s an important step to become a successful author as it evolves collecting and introspecting the critics.
- Rejection always does not mean “END OF THE WORLD”, generally the editor recommends the work to other related journals wherein the focus and aims gels better most appropriately with the content.
- A rejection email by the editor also clarifies the line of undertaking the researcher should take in the future. A free and frank discussion can go long way not only to accomplish your desire to publish but also reboots the positive spirit.
Conclusion: It’s always better to reciprocate than to regret. A frank, free, detailed discussion with the editor regarding manuscript rejection can shatter the clouds of disappointment and manifest new zeal and confidence warranted to become a successful author of a peer-reviewed article.