When submitting manuscripts for peer review, authors are often reluctant to provide information on their manuscript’s submission history, concerned that a prior rejection might reflect badly on their current submission. However, there may be good reasons for disclosing your manuscript’s submission information (if in fact that information is requested through a journal’s online submission form). [Note: For simplicity’s sake, we are assuming that authors here are submitting their manuscript to different journals under the same publisher.]
Often, if this information is not provided by the authors at submission, editors will request it, not to gauge a consensus among other journals’ opinions, but rather to get the most holistic perspective of the paper. It’s true that not all editors require the full picture, but those who do will value your candor. If you wish to avoid a delay in the processing of your manuscript, you should consider these points:
- On initial submission to a journal, be candid about your previous submissions. Even if you’re frustrated by a previous rejection, you should keep in mind that many authors experience rejection in peer review. Rejection at one journal doesn’t mean that an editor at another journal will immediately discount and reject your paper.
- Do not assume that reviewers who previously recommended a manuscript’s rejection will “dig in their heels” and be biased when re-reviewing your manuscript. Reviewers can objectively evaluate your manuscript multiple times. Additionally, review at one journal doesn’t necessarily mean review by the same reviewers at another journal; some editors actually prefer a fresh perspective. Ultimately, it is the editor’s choice as to whether your manuscript will be sent to new reviewers or previous reviewers. Your fear of bias should not discourage you from providing the manuscript’s full history.
- Provide the specific details of your previous submission information, such as the journal name, the handling editor’s name, and the decision. Editors do not always have easy access to the details of your previous submission. If they are interested in the details and you do not provide them, they may delay the processing of your manuscript until they can retrieve the specifics. The more available this information is, the faster the editors can screen and assess your manuscript.
- Prove that you are capable of effectively responding to editors’ or reviewers’ criticisms. Editors are often more likely to offer revision and publication opportunities if you show that you can adequately address the reviewers’ or editors’ criticisms. One way to convince the editor of this is by providing a highlighted manuscript with your changes and a point-by-point response to the comments. These documents can be provided in your cover letter or, if the journal allows them, as supporting files.
- If you do not agree with a previous reviewer’s or editor’s comments, explain why you disagree. Editors will take your response into consideration, rather than assume that you ignored the comments or forgot to address them. If you can address all previous reviewers’ concerns, including the ones with which you do not agree, you may be offered a near immediate acceptance!
If you have any questions or concerns about previous submissions, let us know in the comments below. Or, if you have experience with submitting manuscripts for peer review, we would love to hear your thoughts and experiences!
