slacwriter
Junior member
Posts: 69
|
 |
« on: August 31, 2009, 01:18:50 PM » |
|
Okay, so I submitted an article in early May and still have not heard back from the editors of the journal. I did get the "We received your submission" email. But after that, nothing. The online manuscript submission system still lists it at "under review." For four months? I've endured long reviews before, but never four months. Should I contact the editors? Or give it some more time?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
pinkmouse
|
|
« Reply #1 on: August 31, 2009, 01:35:38 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
daniel_von_flanagan
<redacted>
Distinguished Senior Member
Posts: 9,463
Works all day. Posts all night. Needs sleep.
|
|
« Reply #2 on: August 31, 2009, 01:36:34 PM » |
|
Speaking as an editor, if I tried to force my reviewers to agree to review papers within four months I'd never have any reviewers. I am surprised and delighted when reviews come in earlier.
Remember, most journal refereeing is done on a voluntary basis, often by people who are much busier than you are. - DvF
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The U.S. Education Department is establishing a new national research center to study colleges' ability to successfully educate the country's growing numbers of academically underprepared administrators.
|
|
|
slacwriter
Junior member
Posts: 69
|
|
« Reply #3 on: August 31, 2009, 01:39:30 PM » |
|
Turns out I have reviewed submissions for two journals this summer. One asked for the review within six weeks, another within three months.
Now, I've only published five peer reviewed articles (I am in interdisciplinary social sciences), but none of them have taken four months in this stage of review.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
svenc
|
|
« Reply #4 on: August 31, 2009, 01:39:51 PM » |
|
In economics, four months would be fast.
As Pinkmouse said, if you share your discipline you will get better responses here.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
In foris veritas.
|
|
|
slacwriter
Junior member
Posts: 69
|
|
« Reply #5 on: August 31, 2009, 01:43:06 PM » |
|
Six to twelve months in lit and four would be fast in economics? Huh. Guess I've just been lucky, then. So I take it the implication is that I should sit tight until, say, November, before getting antsy and inquiring of the editor?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
carebearstare
|
|
« Reply #6 on: August 31, 2009, 01:45:17 PM » |
|
I had a similar situation a few months ago, though with slightly different, more bothersome circumstances (posted in a thread someplace; too lazy to find). If the journal has a stated timeline for review and they've gone beyond that, why not write the editor a query? Keep it short, sweet, and not annoying. Things do happen. A friend of mine waited six months only to find the editor never sent his article out for review at all. Oops.
That said, it does take longer in many fields and at many journals. While four months is a long time to wait in my own discipline and in many sciences, it's not long in literature or history, especially at top journals.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Well, some posters were being naughty here.
|
|
|
scienceguy
Distinguished Senior
Member
Posts: 215
|
|
« Reply #7 on: August 31, 2009, 02:45:21 PM » |
|
I'm in chemistry and I've had manuscripts take up to a year.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
monita
|
|
« Reply #8 on: August 31, 2009, 02:48:51 PM » |
|
I've had one out for 10 months, and recently requested an update from the editor. No reply. Crickets.
It's not that awesome of a journal, so I really didn't expect this kind of delay either. Shouldn't they at least keep you posted?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
menotti
|
|
« Reply #9 on: August 31, 2009, 02:53:29 PM » |
|
I've had one out for 10 months, and recently requested an update from the editor. No reply. Crickets.
It's not that awesome of a journal, so I really didn't expect this kind of delay either. Shouldn't they at least keep you posted?
My experience is, the worse the journal, the longer the delay. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
oatmeal
|
|
« Reply #10 on: August 31, 2009, 03:24:39 PM » |
|
Four months is not that long to wait. Of course it is frustrating to wait and wait. After six months, one should hear something. I do not agree with the comment that the worse the journal, the longer it takes. I have found the opposite to be the case--high caliber journals take a long time. When one is waiting for four reviewers to comment, many things can impede on a speedy review--life intervenes and scholars are busy. I see no problem with a friendly email after six months to an editor to ask the status of things. Good luck!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
onestep
|
|
« Reply #11 on: August 31, 2009, 04:16:48 PM » |
|
The top journal in my field gave me 2 weeks to review. I'm a week tardy and they're already sending me hate mail reminders. I finished the review today. At the same journal, my last three submissions had responses back within 4 days (reject, no review), 3 weeks (R&R), and 7 weeks (R&R). This all happened during the purported "summer lull."
I think 4 months is a long time, but not yet unacceptable. At 6 months, I'd be thinking of withdrawing unless it was a paper that's been rejected a lot.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
tenured_cat
|
|
« Reply #12 on: August 31, 2009, 05:23:04 PM » |
|
I have a grant proposal under review since late April. The website says "in progress." Meh - it's a government grant.
An article I just submitted should take about two months to review, according to the editor. I'll start waiting in December.
You have my condolences, OP. Truly, I feel your pain. Get thyself working on the next project. It helps.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Thousands of years ago, cats were worshipped as gods. Cats have never forgotten this." - Anonymous
|
|
|
|
thundering_m
|
|
« Reply #13 on: August 31, 2009, 06:05:55 PM » |
|
Second Cat on Track's admonishment to focus on the next project. But it is hard not to wonder if the seed should be cultivated. I am working up the nerve to contact the editor of a university press series to which I submitted a book proposal. Did not receive even an acknowledgment of submission; this was two months ago. I'm thinking summer = suspended animation.
But I'd like to know the trajectory. How long before they decide whether or not to send it out for review, and what is their usual turnaround for reviews? It's a book series, so, unlike a journal, they probably don't have trends based on many submissions.
This call for proposals did not indicate that the submission must be exclusive. I wonder if it is OK to submit it elsewhere, telling the new publisher it has been submitted elsewhere.
Dither dither dither.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
-TM
Thundering Marshmallow
|
|
|
|
marginalia
|
|
« Reply #14 on: August 31, 2009, 08:33:37 PM » |
|
The journal in question should either have their standard timeframe listed in the guidelines, or they should have told you the expected timeframe in an editorial email.
If there is no information about the timeframe anywhere, I would email them right away and ask about their timeframe.
If you know the timeframe, and they are late, I would base my reaction on how late they are. I needed to query twice before. One time the review that was expected to take three months took six months. I queried at five months. Another time, the review that was expected to take six weeks took four months. I emailed at four months. If you have your receipt and can track the progress of your paper online, there is not a lot of reasons to query at four months unless you need the result asap (i.e. for tenure) or are reconsidering submitting elsewhere.
I also would like to second Cat on Track: at this point you should be focusing on your next project and ideally getting it ready to submit. The more pieces you have in the pipeline/nearing submission, the less you worry about the submitted piece(s), from experience.
Best of luck!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
My new motto: If you want a cookie, bake a cookie.
|
|
|
|
