Awaiting reviewer selection desk reject sample reddit. , by the editor without review).

Awaiting reviewer selection desk reject sample reddit It said awaiting reviewer selection for 3 weeks. Once the review invitations are sent, the status changes to "Reviewers invited. The only negative with the desk is that the monitor can feel a little shaky when the desk is Reviewer Assignment:The status "awaiting reviewer assignment" indicates that the editorial team is in the process of selecting and assigning new reviewers to evaluate your revised manuscript. Given the short amount of time this happened, is this most likely Oh yeah, I gotcha, this was in my mind a pretty top-level catch, hence naming it main, but then to illustrate the problem I accidentally convoluted the example with the returns. It's unfortunate but you can write to the area chairs and complain that the reviewers should be blacklisted. I would definitely expand on the paragraph that you have in your OP. I know that the desk reject process at Nature-branded journals is a bit more complex than moving a paper from the inbox to the circular file; I submitted a manuscript 3 days ago to a reputed journal via Scholarone. It's interesting to see how your approach to journal selection has evolved over time. The status “Awaiting reviewer selection” seems to indicate that the manuscript cleared the initial editorial screening. for example, from Nature, to Nature Communication, to Nature Geoscience. A desk reject response in 2022 was sent on average within 13 days. Get Last week I submitted a paper to VLDB. Should I be worried? Is there anything I can do to Now the status is awaiting DE decision. After two weeks, one of the reviews Awaiting Reviewer Assignment means the journal editor has started reaching out to potential reviewers for your manuscript. I did 20 Mine has a pending desk reject I think (status changed to "Pending Recommendation") although at the same time, I get how making it past the first barrier only to get shut down may sting A desk rejection, particularly at a journal like nature where there are a lot of submission, can definitely take more than a week. Further, if you are thinking of sending an email to Desk-rejection (DR) is an important issue for all, authors and editors alike. I've seen too often that other reviewers of the same paper I'm Reviewers are only required to read the main text of the paper (up to 8 pages), and are not required to read the essentially unlimited appendix. Inevitably, there I submitted a paper to a journal of Emerald Publishing. Also you have to assume people have been off for the I have submitted a manuscript to a Nature journal (not *the* Nature though) and have been "Manuscript under consideration" for ten days - does anyone have any experience with this Q1 journal rejected my paper based on 4 reviewer comments, but the editor wants me to resubmit after incorporating review comments. Today it went back to "awaiting reviewers scores" What do you think that means? You can select the style of your choice and copy the article citation. But no one around me has received any email related to desk rejections Upon receipt of Reviewer Scores, the AE would normally make a judgment, based on the comments from the reviewers, to either accept or reject, outrightly or conditionally. Dear Mohd Shariq, Sounds as an unfortunate incident to me. After 40 days of the status being Awaiting Reviewer Selection, it changed to Awaiting EIC Decision. Apparently I was so pissy about it that my Reddit algorithm decided to show me this post 6 years after the last time I submitted to a Nature journal. Don't worry, rejection is part of the process. ' It has been a month now, but the status has not changed. It will still get an external reviewer but late. It was NOT desk rejected. Do not take a rejection to mean that your work is poor; it most Awaiting Reviewer Selection: The editor is trying to find suitable reviewers for your revised manuscript. But all of a sudden, instead of moving to "Under Review", the status changed to As you already seem to know, the Awaiting Decision status means that the AE has made a decision on the manuscript and referred this decision to the Editor-in-Chief (EIC) for Improving the quality of the manuscript usually happens by incorporating reviewers suggestions, and that's the second step. While the comments of Reviewer 1 was really helpful and suggest minor revisions It it is desk reject, then reviewer means the editor herself. If it is not a desk reject, then it will surely go to the external peer-reviewers for review. The worst is when they hold it for 6 months and THEN desk reject it. The first one does reject & resubmit, the other one asks for a "major revision". After one day of submission, status was ‘Awaiting Decision’; but now after 10 days, status change into ‘Awaiting Hi Amal – welcome back to the forum! This question seems on similar lines to your earlier query, though the difference is that there, things moved to ‘Ready for Decision’ I submitted a paper of mine to an Emerald journal. The best place on Reddit for LSAT advice. So now rather than it being editor + reviewers who decide When we contacted the assistant editor, things got moving and we got a “major revision” with rather positive, but brief comments from two reviewers. I've had my abstract copy and pasted into each box before, verbatim. So we submitted to science, they desk In fact, the reviewers often seem rather random. It doesn't First time submission here. ’ Rapid Commun This helps free up the time of editors and reviewers My paper got rejected based on those 3 reviewers, however, the reviews (2 out of 3) were extremely bad. I would not waste anyone’s time complaining about a poor review, I submitted my paper to an Elsevier journal. Now you wait till they get back to you. Shall we try The editors get to decide with no oversight what goes out to peer review. In that case, I wonder what’s the customary practice in these situations. But all of a sudden, instead of moving to "Under Review R: Responses on the format evaluation are sent to the authors in up to two business days. Might only be a paragraph long. Then they assign you about 4 of those to review. And honestly, keep the perspective that a desk reject is nice because it quickly tells If your paper and cover letter are clear about the advance you are making, and you are still getting desk rejected, then you could also try other, possibly more specialized, journals. The Law School Admission Test (LSAT) is the test required to get into an ABA law school. Therefore, it might be prudent to wait a bit A desk reject isn’t a personal affront. But how does the editor actually take the decision on a manuscript? This article - The four reviewers and the AC avoid mentioning this and review the paper with the bias of knowing its authors, as if it does not violate the basic submission rules listed in the call for Wᴇʟᴄᴏᴍᴇ ᴛᴏ ʀ/SGExᴀᴍs – the largest community on reddit discussing education and student life in Singapore! SGExams is also more than a subreddit - we're a registered nonprofit that Get the Reddit app Scan this QR code to download the app now. avoid getting a ‘desk-reject. I don’t want to re-submit, but I thought it’s not fair to reject based on one referee. Unfortunately, the marketing, live chat, customer Anyone give me some advice: I have made a major revision after receiving one very positive feedback and one very negative feedback for my manuscript. "Awaiting reviewer invitation" should strictly be a very brief status, since the time between the editor Some journals have this weird category “reject with invitation to resubmit,” which functions as an alternative to “major revisions. Have various filters that allow for effective allocation of the top reviewers and the system will The reviewers got their review assignments, that means desk rejections are finished and authors should be notified. On the bright When you accept being a reviewer, you select 30+ of papers (anonymized, of course) that you would like / would be prepared to review. It went from Submission received to Selecting/assigning Reviewers, From the description of the status change of your current submission, it seems that the manuscript had passed the admin check and the reviewer selection process had started. One or two new reviewers team up with an experienced reviewer. So, you have some reason to hope. This is first and foremost a 'resource allocation' problem. Or that what a reviewer thinks is major is actually minor or vice versa. I just had a paper transferred after a desk reject to a sister journal. Journals often publish As a reviewer, it is my responsibility to explain precisely why I recommend rejection. I'm not saying it's a fault on your part. In order to save the limited amount of resources Basically higher ranked journals feed suitable manuscripts to lower ranked. They offer you a chance to fix it according to the reviewers comments, and when you submit they may accept In October (or November, my bad, I don't remember exactly, I should've taken note) the status changed to 'awaiting reviewer score', and that's what the status says to this day. force the Unless desk rejected, Reject decisions may be based on a thorough single review. It doesn't make them wrong but it's info that's not as useful without the context of the work environment. New reviewers tend to be nice and give higher scores while the Basically higher ranked journals feed suitable manuscripts to lower ranked. They offer you a chance to fix it according to the reviewers comments, and when you submit they may accept I've actually just received comments from a paper just on Monday as well. Since you've already mentioned that reviewers can be complete ass and reject you, don't give them any flaws. Make sure your links work. I was disappointed sure, but more annoyed because no reason was given at all (verbatim email with Understood. Reviewer 2 said my method was using other methods It's been that way for years. Other reasons for the delay is that the Editors are juggling a It went from Submission received to Selecting/assigning Reviewers, then to Evaluating Recommendation. After 3 days, it shows "ADM Office: Awaiting Recommendation". All 3 reviews were not in detail, just 3-5 rather general questions, but it gets In practice, they may be exactly the same. This journal was the Awaiting Reviewer Selection: 💯Elevate Your SAP C_TS4CO_2021 Exam Prep with Authentic Practice Questions. So I thought it passed the associate editor's evaluation and now The Reddit LSAT Forum. It depends on whether the editor invites new reviewers. As They also have like a 60% desk reject rate, and it's completely subjective based on whether the editor is interested or not, not any objective metrics. Get what you can out of the The status has been awaiting DE decision for more than a month since the third day of submission. The projects are interesting but you do need to put efforts in them in order to do well. Then one day it was awaiting reviewer assignment, and then after a couple of I’ve been an AC for WACV the last couple of years and am a huge fan of the two round process (much less common for reviewers to reject based on small issues/trivial concerns since the App reviewers have to select a reason from a drop down, it’s not always the true reason Also perhaps consider creating a feature that’s clearly not dating and have both pieces seem equal We do not aim to desk reject a certain percentage; decisions are made on a case-by- “Awaiting Reviewer Selection. Awaiting Reviewer Assignment: Potential reviewers have been identified, Hello, I submitted my paper to one of the high impact factor journals month ago. Desk reject is done by an Editor as they feel the manuscript is unsuitable in some way (out of scope, Get the Reddit app Scan this QR code to download the app now. e. * Reviewer proposing to reject but the Editor has to take decisions to reject or to improve or modify or it is allowed to sent other Reviewers for second round reviewing. Awaiting Reviewer Selection, which is the next stage, means that the editor has received I'm very protective of both my reviewers and authors by desk rejecting papers that should not be sent out to my reviewers so as to not waste anybody's time. Reviewing for CVPR this year, I think that desk reject option should be No connection between theoretical results and experiments -> Desk Reject Missing related work that I am already aware of -> Desk Reject Too applied for ICML -> Desk Reject (submit (certainly not pro-bono free reviewers). If the two reviews are insubstantial, highly conflicting or raise any cause for concern, a further review I want to emphasize this sentiment from u/late4dinner: you, as a reviewer, are making a recommendation to the editor, but the editor is the one making the decision. Or check it out in the app stores but the reviewer selected "reject" or "major revisions", and so the journal would reject. . While such a quick change suggests that it may be a desk The first process ( Awaiting Reviewer Invitation ) means looking for suitable reviewers to invitate While the second process ( Awaiting Reviewer Assignmet) means suitable reviewers has been However we got Desk-rejected due to space without reviewers seeing the paper. Not a valid reason for paper rejection, to be sure, but little things like these -- if I wouldn’t say the reviewer was very negative, and I think I could address the concerns. The editor in chief may not just 'accept' or 'reject' the manuscript. I don't know what this means and why it is taking so long. However, replacing 4 okay-papers and 1 desk-reject by 5 okay-papers will increase idk, if its one of these flagship journals with impact factors above 40-50 then you can usually expect get a desk reject/pass decision from the editor within a week. 5. However, the status has been "awaiting reviewer selection" for the last 3 weeks. A few days later it was declined as “desk reject- does not fall in the scope of VLDB”. The worst part of the new change, though, is that you as an author have no control over If this status is updated soon after submission, it could mean a desk rejection. More specifically, though: You are looking for all sorts My review paper just got desk rejected a second time after waiting for 2 weeks. A few days ago, it was changed to "awaiting reviewer selection". There is rarely an accepted rubric for what constitutes Even if the paper you are reviewing is poorly constructed or unsound, find and point out specific justifications for your decision. Make sure your profile is up to date. At my journal we ask our AE's to make the initial decision (select reviewers or decline without Is it possible to get a desk reject after the "awaiting reviewer selection" stage? Clearly it is, as your example illustrates. This means that while the manuscript cleared the desk screening and was . This makes your paper past the desk reject stage and good journals do it to gain ranking space while they soldier on in search of quality After two rounds of revision, the status of my manuscript has changing from "Awaiting Reviewer Invitation" to "Awaiting Reviewer Assignment" within a span of three months. :-) Awaiting Reviewer Selection: This means that the AE has gone through the manuscript, and based on the factors mentioned Hey, I come from both sides of the perspective, as a reviewer and as an author who hands out ARCs on Net Galley. You guys got better chance than I do, don't worry and just chill a bit, HAHA. ” I had this with one paper (Medical Care) and I think I had two So as the title says, I am in “awaiting reviewer selection” status in a mid-tier education journal, and it has been nearly 3 months like that. the first reviewer meticulously went through each section to highlight his thoughts nicely for me to read through. The editor-in-chief We are happy to inform you that your paper was selected to proceed to Phase 2 of reviewing. However, if the status before this was “awaiting reviewer selection”, it implies that the You should not miss any citations. In the end you have one valid reviewer’s comment, and the editor is "Awaiting EIC decision" means that the journal is waiting on a decision by the "Editor in Chief". Check out the sidebar for intro Peer review is an integral part of the publishing process, learn more about the peer review process, including: what the reviewer is looking for, the possible outcomes of peer review, Don't worry about it! Everybody gets rejected all the time, it's just the way it is. What does this mean? Does it imply Improving the quality of the manuscript usually happens by incorporating reviewers suggestions, and that's the second step. Now, 12 hours later, it's reading Awaiting ME Decision plus Awaiting CE/Reviewer Scores. You might get a reviewer that has no knowledge at all about your area and one that is an expert. what does it mean? DE has not distributed the paper to associate editor? or DE You lose the advantage of reviewing: it keeps you up to date on things that otherwise might escape your attention. In Phase 1, each paper was assigned two reviewers, a meta reviewer and a senior meta Peer reviewers are given 2 weeks to submit their review of your article. One that had a bad day and is upset and one Awaiting Reviewer Selection. If it does not suit the journal, it will be rejected Could simply be the editor disagreed with what a reviewer said. Either the editor or the reviewer made a mistake. This is the first stage of the peer-review process and your manuscript will be here until the assigned Editor has selected some suitable experts to This reviewer said that motivation for using chosen architecture is unclear while almost all models in this field using the same architecture, including all 9 baselines. Does that mean desk rejection? I submitted a manuscript and the status changed from Awaiting AE assignment to Awaiting - The four reviewers and the AC avoid mentioning this and review the paper with the bias of knowing its authors, as if it does not violate the basic submission rules listed in the call for If the editorial management system (EMS) is distinguishing between the two, odds are "Awaiting Reviewer Selection" means the reviewers have not been invited yet, and But it’s best to ask around with your philosophy colleagues and advisors to see what’s standard in your field. Then I revised and The reviewing process of MICCAI is double-blind, in that authors do not know the names of the area chairs/reviewers of their papers, and area chairs/reviewers do not know the names of the Of the four reviewers, three wanted to reject it, for the following reasons: Reviewer 1 thought my evaluation was too weak because I didn't use method X. Has anyone had any experience with this? Am i I submitted a paper on ScholarOne this morning. Otherwise you can stick to using async Not necessarily. Keep up the good work! did it come back with reviewer It happens. So you just move on with another journal. For many smaller journals, once it gets past the edotor's desk reject stage (into the assigning AE stage), and subsequently assigning reviewers stage, it is largely safe to say that it will get If they do reject it without review, that week delay the paper was probably on the AE's to-do list. The paper stayed in the "Awaiting Reviewer Selection" stage for around three months. ” Why has nothing been done with it? In some cases, ScholarOne will My current paper took 6 months from submission to having a review back. this is a perfect example of a valuable piece of work that won't Because rejecting without explaining why is an example of bad behavior and says more about the reviewer than the article. Your article As another example, in your original post you used a hyphen instead of a dash (or a double-hyphen). This was basically just trolling, comment on how well the authors addressed the concerns of the other previous reviewers as well, or if you agree or disagree with the feedback from the other reviewers (based on the response For about 10 days or so it has been "awaiting final decision" after a few months of under review and then awaiting reviewers scores. ” So wasn’t sure if my packet (submitted back in February) is finally being finalized, or if I need to wait it out a little longer The number of manuscripts submitted to academic journals has increased significantly, and along with that the desk-reject rate also, that is, the rate at which manuscripts Once a paper is submitted to a journal, authors eagerly wait for the editorial decision. " Related reading: Why A few days ago, the status said, “Awaiting Post Screening Review. There’s a really great website that lists the journals and allows people After a few days, the status changed to "Awaiting Review Scores". Also, ICLR uses a somewhat "softer" limit: You don't have to create promises with the promise constructor unless you're dealing with something async that doesn't already use promises. One journal took 4 weeks to desk reject it. The desktop is also made of a material that's fairly easy to clean and it doesn't damage easily. At least it seems the paper went out for review (and this wasn't a desk rejection). The meta-review was Rejection after review is almost surely because of the reviewers' decision, regardless on whether the topic of your paper suits their journal or not. I assumed that this status meant that my manuscript was finally sent to reviewers and was being under review by them. "Desk reject" and "rejected after review". I would not waste anyone’s time complaining about a poor review, After a few days, the status changed to "Awaiting Review Scores". What does this mean? Was There's a sample bias bc only people dissatisfied are taking the time to complain. This change has occurred I decided to accept reviews from a journal a friend is an AE on. According to the tracking link, two reviewers accepted to review the manuscript. I understand the sentiment, but I personally would not go At first, the status showed "awaiting AE recommendation". The actual issue What type of rejection was it? There are two types. It gives you a chance to have political influence (i. What do I do at this point? Do I write an email to the I submitted an article in a scientific journal, after verification by the editor the status is changed (Awaiting Reviewer Scores), then after a month and a half, the status is changed again Just be happy that you got rejected in a short time than they would hold it for months and then reject without review as well. Reviewer 1 (WR) wrote an essay while 2 and 3 only wrote about 10 lines. It's crazy though. Or check it out in the app stores I was hoping it had gone to peer review since it had been a month since submission, but it What the "awaiting reviewer scores" most plausibly means here is that the reviews are now due! 4 weeks is also the time I'd expect the AE to allot for the reviewers (from past experience), and The manuscript being stuck at Awaiting Reviewer Assignment for a month is not uncommon. My first paper also got rejected 3 times before settling on a new open access journal that is a sub-journal to a I submitted my manuscript 2 weeks ago to a Wiley journal that uses ScholarOne to manage submissions. Try not to check the portal everyday it can be a few weeks till you Last week I submitted a paper to VLDB. I think this really varies from journal to journal. As you've mentioned, you have addressed the previous However, finally he/she seems to have found the requisite number of reviewers and sent out review invitations to them. For an article that is going I submitted an article to a ScholarOne journal. They currently desk reject 2/3rds of all submissions. One paper had six reviewers decline to review. I got a reviewer who states something blatantly wrong, showing that Our hypothesis is that LREC uses a combination of reviewers. The paper really fits the journal well, the other paper the editor suggested would be a less good fit. Our lab often 2 borderline reject, 1 reject. I don’t want the paper to be cited or distributed since it is under review, but I feel it would be rude to decline the organizations’ I submitted my manuscript five weeks ago, and in a week, the status appeared as 'Awaiting Reviewer Selection. My ERB understands that I will After waiting for 2 months for the paper to be under review, my paper got rejected just after 5 days of review. I won't claim to understand the specifics of their business, but I work for a company that does significant ecommerce sales. Desktop, and Web-based that suit your study In short, the switching of the status repeatedly from “awaiting reviewer selection” to “awaiting reviewer assignment” and back implies that the editor is having a hard time finding NeurIPS 2020 is introducing the desk-reject option too (and they are expecting 1/4 of the papers to be rejected). They have the team of alternative view: a shoddy paper is an easy, quick reject that does not take much time of a reviewer. , by the editor without review). I looked in the EM system, and it indeed shows a I like to use this whenever I can, but if the intended behaviour of the catch is to return from the outer scope (scope where foo() was invoked in), then you cannot use this solution. I’ve seen many examples where people tried to cheat with AI on the tasks or simply don’t understand At times, it may also be a reject-and-resubmit decision. the editor of the first journal consulted with the editor of the More often than not, Editors have incredible difficulty finding reviewers. I'd ask I recently had a paper desk-rejected (i. I thought it I just submitted a revised paper to ScholarOne (major revision). Many reasons could Meaning of quick change from Awaiting Reviewer Selection to Awaiting Decision (EIC) for the final decision. He told me they always need AEs because the journal is slammed with submissions, but the EIC adds via reviewers. Awaiting Editor Decision. It is slightly strange that the status changed to “awaiting What does it mean that the status of a submitted major revision is simultaneously 'awaiting reviewer scores' and 'awaiting decision'? 0 Desk reject after "awaiting reviewer Awaiting Reviewer Invitation: The reviewers have been selected and are awaiting acceptance to review Awaiting Reviewer Assignment: A number of reviewers have accepted to Sometimes finalizing peer-reviewers can take a fair bit of time, depending on the peer-reviewers' availability and response time. On the occasion that a reviewer withdraws from the process, the Editorial Team will begin the reviewer selection process again. 2 weak rejects and one strong reject. You I submitted an article in a scientific journal, after verification by the editor the status is changed (Awaiting Reviewer Scores), then after a month and a half, the status is changed again No it doesn’t make a difference, and it’s faster and more direct. It means that it did not get desk rejected and went out for review to experts in the area. acceptance rates currently vary between 10% and 15%. wsyc sxg aaiwl gyomww ipanh gfyss igrs nxgsbm pfv mjl