Co-author Guide and Acceptance letter in a Journal

Some journals may send Co-Authors an email containing deep links to confirm Co-Authorship. Corresponding Authors may also be allowed to control the Other Author verification procedure by the Journal.

Who is the Co-author?

A Co-author is someone who has made a significant contribution to a journal publication. They also share accountability and responsibility for the outcomes.

If an article has more than one author, you’ll choose the corresponding author. This person will be in charge of all article correspondence and sign the publishing agreement on behalf of all authors. The corresponding author is in charge of ensuring that all of the authors’ contact information is correct.

Roles of Co-author

  • The corresponding (submitting) author is exclusively responsible for communicating with Scientific Reports and handling co-author correspondence. Do Correction and proofreading of manuscripts. Handle modifications and re-submissions of updated manuscripts until the manuscripts are accepted.
  • Accepting and signing the Author Publishing Agreement on behalf of all necessary co-authors and obtaining the signature of any third-party rights owners.
  • Arranging for APC (article processing charge) payment. Under Open Access Agreements, the corresponding author’s affiliation is considered to assess eligibility for discounted or waived APCs.
  • Act on behalf of all co-authors in responding to post-publication requests from all sources, including issues about publishing ethics, content reuse, and the availability of data, materials, and resources.

There are several compelling reasons why you should work together on a publication. Collaborations in research are one of the finest reasons. Collaborations in research might be one of the most satisfying aspects of your scientific career. Working with “masters” in your profession or experts from other fields can substantially extend your horizons and provide you with access to knowledge, methods, infrastructure, and labor. Collaborations in research frequently result in two or more publications. It is common for one publication to be driven by your partners in these instances. Your contribution is recognized with a co-authorship, several co-authorships, or, in ideal cases, an asterisk indicating “equal contribution.”

Acceptance letter for co-authors

Journal editors exclusively send emails to the corresponding author, not the co-authors. The corresponding author is the journal’s sole point of contact. The corresponding author’s responsibility is to relay the editor’s messages to the co-authors. Journal editor cannot send individual acceptance letters to every co-author. As a result, You should contact the associated author and request that the acceptance letter is forwarded to you if you require it.

Conclusion

Based on the Authors position in the research process and paper preparation, authors can be designated as the lead author, first author, co-author, or corresponding author. The corresponding author is in charge of the manuscript during the submission, peer review, and production processes.

From submission to publication, all communication will be with the relevant author. However, there is a recurrent dispute over whether or not an article can have more than one associated author. Some or several co-authorships may enhance scientific cooperation and reciprocal intellectual stimulation and expand your publication list and fill gaps in your publication history.  It is better to avoid publishing too many papers with many co-authorships.

Reasons for Facing Desk Rejection

There are numerous causes for rejection; however, desk rejection or rejection without peer review is one of the most annoying emails an author gets. It’s not uncommon to have a paper rejected. To decide how to continue from there, you must first understand why the journal editor did not send it out for peer review.

It’s critical to comprehend the reasons behind a rejection before deciding on a strategy. It’s usually simple to extract the criticism about your work from a peer review report and organize your next steps accordingly. It can be more difficult to comprehend why your work was rejected by the journal editor without having been sent out for review. This blog post summarizes the five most prevalent reasons for rejection without peer review to assist you decides on a resubmission strategy.

  1. If the manuscript does not meet the journal’s objectives or scope

It’s doubtful that the paper will be approved if it won’t be of interest or value to the journal’s readers. When deciding which magazine to submit to, always read the Aims and Scope to get a sense of the types of papers the journal is searching for. In other words, does your work, beyond its scientific scope, fit the journal’s unique geographical region? Distinct journals have different scopes, which are usually quite narrow. Make sure your manuscript is appropriate for the journal you want to submit it to.

  1. If the results of your research were not significant or new enough

Journal editors frequently reject papers without submitting them for peer review because they do not believe the manuscript is appropriate for their publication. If you submit your manuscript to a publication with a diverse audience in terms of expertise, the editor may decide that your study isn’t of sufficient interest to a large enough section of the readership.

It’s also possible that the journal editor isn’t sure that your findings are substantial enough to warrant publication. This implies they may not anticipate their having far-reaching repercussions for your field of study. It is usually also necessary for journals with high journal impact factors if the research is original and has not been published before, even if only in part.

  1. If plagiarism is too high

Plagiarism should be avoided at all costs. You could be accused of plagiarism if you intentionally or unintentionally plagiarized the work of other researchers. Manuscripts are run through various plagiarism detection software programmes by publications. If there is more than 20% duplication in a manuscript, it will be returned to the authors for editing. The publishers may report the material as plagiarized if that percentage is significantly greater. If you effectively plagiarize your own work by merely repackaging it, you may be called out.

  1. If your data is inadequately presented, and you applied inappropriate methods

Editors of broad-read journals typically cover a significant percentage of a research field, thus they are unlikely to be specialists in your research topic. As a result, people are likely to skip over your Results section and instead focus on your data when evaluating the quality of your research.

Even if the journal editor is unfamiliar with your research topic, you may expect them to have a strong awareness of what is going on in your field in general. As a result, if they see that you employed an obsolete method or didn’t use a strategy properly, your work will most likely be rejected right away.

  1. If there are issues with language, writing, and spelling

The document’s language, organization, and any tables or figures must all be of sufficient quality to be examined; if this is not possible, the paper will be rejected. Your abstract, cover letter, references, and, if applicable, your discussion and/or conclusions section are usually of particular interest to journal editors (s). It’s usually a good idea to have someone else look through your paper before you submit it; the second set of eyes can help you catch any mistakes you may have overlooked.

There are other causes for submission rejection, but these are only a few of the most typical issues cited by journals. For busy researchers, it may appear to be a lot of work, and this is where we, ManuscriptEdit may help.

Should I reply to an editor after a paper has been rejected?

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.