Three ways to optimize your publication journey through editorial insights

Lessons from a recent Researcher Academy webinar

The publication journey is often like a bumpy road. It can take months from submitting your work to having it published. In the recent Researcher Academy webinar, “Shorten your path to publication: researcher insights from submission to rejection opens in new tab/window,” a group of Scientific Editors simplified this long and complex process by focusing on three key stages. Here is a summary of their advice to help you reach the destination, if not on the first attempt, in as few tries as possible.

1. Before submission: Being realistic keeps you on the right track

Setting the right expectations is a crucial step in the pre-submission stage. This involves finding a suitable journal albeit not necessarily the highest impact journal in your field. While it’s understandable to aim for a well-known title, a good fit with the journal’s scope is key. Having a solid understanding of different journal types can be beneficial. For instance, subject-specific journals are aimed at a specialized audience and might hold more prestige in their respective fields, while broad-scope journals cater to a wider audience and favor interdisciplinary research.

To improve your chances of acceptance, try to consider multiple factors and be honest about the quality level of your work. In the meantime, be prepared for revisions and rejections, which can occur even if you believe you have conducted solid research and found the ideal journal. It’s important to recognize that these are common parts of the publication journey, and get yourself ready for handling revisions.

“Having a good overview of the publication process can help reduce stress, keep you motivated, and achieve publication faster, even if you do not succeed on your first try.” – Rohan Chakrabarty, Scientific Editor (energy)

2. After submission: Make the most out of reviewer feedback

Peer review serves to maintain scientific and publication standards and improve the quality of published research. Reviewer comments should be constructive, helping you meet editorial criteria and strengthen your work. Sometimes, they are positive, bringing you closer to publication. Other times, they can lead to revision or even rejection (learn how to respond to reviewer comments calmly). So, what to do if you’ve waited a few weeks or even months but your paper is still not accepted?

You might think it better to have been “desk rejected” in the first place, but there are reasons why you shouldn’t think that way. The insight you’ll gain from the peer review process doesn’t just help you to improve; it can also help editors at another journal make informed, and sometimes faster, decisions (if the comments are transferred alongside the paper). If this is the case, there is no need for additional reviewers, saving time all round. The feedback, then, can facilitate the publication of more impactful work in a different, ultimately better fitting journal. Whatever the outcome, having your paper sent for peer review is a cause for celebration.

“Even if your paper is rejected (after peer review), that expert feedback is never wasted. Revisions that you might make based on these comments are critical to the next steps.” – Eleanne van Vliet, Scientific Editor environmental science)

3. If you do get rejected, do you go your own way or follow transfer advice?

Every year, millions of researchers encounter rejection. If your submission isn’t successful, there are different ways to deal with it. One possible scenario is that you receive a transfer offer after rejection, so you might follow its advice or submit elsewhere. You have the freedom to decide where to submit next, and this approach allows you to make major changes to your manuscript, since you will be starting a brand-new submission.

If you follow the transfer route, however, the road could be less bumpy. According to 2022 and 2023 data from Elsevier, papers submitted to transfer-suggested journals have a 60% higher acceptance rate than those submitted elsewhere. Transferred papers are also accepted roughly two weeks faster than average. Although individual outcomes vary, tailored editorial suggestions or data-driven recommendations can support you in identifying good alternatives quickly and easily.

“Making this recommendation to the authors often saves time, because the editors thought our work would be better in a different journal, which would prevent an inappropriate submission process again.” – Chemistry author

Shortening the publication journey as much as possible is the ideal scenario. This cannot be achieved with just one click but one small step at each stage can make a significant difference overall. Hopefully, the three approaches outlined above are helpful for your publication, whether you are just starting off or right in the middle of the process.

Watch the full webinar here opens in new tab/window and explore other learning resources on Elsevier’s free-learning platform, Researcher Academy opens in new tab/window