|
amador
|
 |
« on: November 02, 2009, 06:05:17 PM » |
|
Got an answer from a journal, and I don't know if it's an "accepted with changes" or a "review and resubmit". Reviewer says: "I recommend that the article be accepted for publication provided that the following suggestions are incorporated". Said suggestions are for the most part not difficult to implement, and the reviewer is mostly suggesting ameliorating the article rather than rewriting it.
However, the editor writes, more formally : "Our readers have advised me to reconsider your article for publication should you wish to resubmit it to us after having their unedited observations which follow".
Should I expect it will be published once I apply the changes?
How should I list this item in my CV? Is it still "under review" or "conditionally accepted" or "forthcoming"?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
svenc
|
|
« Reply #1 on: November 02, 2009, 06:11:07 PM » |
|
It's the Editor, and not the individual reviewer(s), who gets to determine the actual status of your manuscript. The Editor is telling you it's an R&R, so that's what it is.
I have had similar reviews, where reviewers' comments were passed along that were a bit more positive than the Editor's take on the manuscript. Many journals specifically instruct reviewers to NOT make any such recommendations in the comments for the authors, just to avoid any confusion such as this.
It's frustrating, but the good news is that if the reviewer's comments were that positive, your chances are good.
Do not, under any circumstances, list this item as "conditionally accepted" or "forthcoming" in any job applications. You can upgrade it from "under review" to "revision requested" if you want to be more specific, but that's it.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: November 02, 2009, 06:12:09 PM by svenc »
|
Logged
|
In foris veritas.
|
|
|
|
offthemarket
|
|
« Reply #2 on: November 02, 2009, 06:38:54 PM » |
|
It needs to be revised before you resbumit it, and it will be a "reconsider" by the editor. Reads like a textbook R and R to me. Reviewers can say all kinds of stuff, but it's the editorial decision that matters.
I list these as "in review" or "under revison" or "revision submitted" or something like that on my CV, if it matters, usually only for promotion/tenure issues where they want to see what I have in progress.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ls410
|
|
« Reply #3 on: November 02, 2009, 06:55:19 PM » |
|
I have a section on my CV for 'In Revision' (as well as In Review and Published). For R&R, I include a note in () that says something along the lines of Revisions Requested November 2009, Expected Resubmission December 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
temporaryname
Junior faculty,
Senior member
Posts: 896
|
|
« Reply #4 on: November 03, 2009, 01:14:01 PM » |
|
In general, I tend not to see any difference between "accepted with revisions" and "review and resubmit"--both of them require revisions, after all, so there's more work to do. Treat them both like that, and you don't have to worry about being too overconfident about things.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
snowbound
|
|
« Reply #5 on: November 05, 2009, 07:25:45 AM » |
|
Sounds like they want to publish it. Be happy! A "revise and resubmit," but with the editor making clear that the final decision has, of course, not been made. If the changes aren't made to editor's satisfaction, sure, they won't publish it. Since the recommended changes are minor, go ahead and make them as soon as possible and resubmit, reminding the editor that you were asked to revise and resubmit and are doing so. Then, on your CV, you can say (if you really need to for tenure or whatever) "revision submitted" as Offthemarket suggests. That shows that you have had an encouraging response from a journal.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mickeymantle
|
|
« Reply #6 on: November 05, 2009, 08:01:28 AM » |
|
I would be careful about treating a R and R as a conditional acceptance. Twice over the last several years I've resubmitted, only to be finally rejected. The first time occurred because the editor thought the article too laudatory, for some reason; the second because a reviewer added more objections on the second round and the editor felt that hu couldn't ask me to do more revisions. The first article was finally published in a much better(!) journal, the second is still undergoing review elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
klausk
|
|
« Reply #7 on: November 09, 2009, 08:08:48 PM » |
|
OP, you would be foolish to list the paper as "conditionally accepted" or "forthcoming."
The editor never wrote s/he would *accept* your paper. "Reconsider" is absolutely different from "Accept." "Forthcoming" means that the paper has been unconditionally accepted and will be in print. Unless you have a formal, unconditional acceptance letter, you haven't published it.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
