From Submission to "Decision in Process": Recognising the signs of desk rejection

Submitting a research paper to a journal can be a nerve-wracking experience, filled with anticipation and uncertainty. The process starts with the hopeful click of the "Submit" button, but what happens next is a bit of a mystery to many authors. One of the first hurdles authors often face is the dreaded "desk rejection

Initial Screening of the Manuscript

Once a paper is submitted to a journal, the first stop is the editor's desk. The editor conducts an initial screening, assessing if the paper aligns with the journal's scope and meets its basic standards. This step serves several key purposes:

1. Alignment With Journal Scope:

The editor will assess whether the submitted paper aligns with the journal's scope, focus, and priorities. They will consider if the research topic, methodology, and findings are a good fit for the journal.

2. Adherence to Journal Guidelines:

The editor will check if the manuscript adheres to the journal's specific formatting, structure, and submission requirements like proper citation style, figure/table formatting, and word count.

3. Preliminary Quality Assessment:

The editor will perform a high-level assessment of the paper's quality, novelty, and potential contribution to the field. They look for clear research questions, sound methodology, and compelling conclusions.

4. Screening for Ethical and Legal Issues:

The editor will screen for any potential ethical concerns and ensure the paper complies with relevant legal requirements.

As a result, this stage serves as a filter to ensure that only papers with potential for publication move forward. Based on the assessment during the initial screening process, the manuscript will receive one of two outcomes:

1.      Desk Rejection

If the manuscript does not meet the journal's criteria or is not aligned with its scope and standards, it will be desk rejected. This means it will not proceed to the peer review stage and will be returned to the author with a rejection decision.

2.      Move to Peer Review

Once the paper clears the initial screening, the next stage is peer review. The peer review process is a multi-stage journey. Peer reviewers, who are experts in the field, will evaluate the manuscript in detail and provide feedback to the editor, which ultimately informs the final publication decision. Based on these reviews, the editor then makes a final decision: accept, revise, and resubmit or reject.

What is "Decision in Process"?

Authors often eagerly check their submission status, hoping for acceptance of their manuscript. In the vast majority of cases, a "Decision in Process" status shortly after submitting the manuscript indicates that the paper has undergone the initial desk review by the editor and has not been selected to move forward to the peer review stage. This is commonly referred to as a "desk rejection."

The rationale behind this is straightforward - the peer review process itself typically takes several weeks, if not months, to complete. For a decision to be reached in the span of just a week or two after submission, it is highly unlikely that the paper would have been sent out for external peer review in that timeframe.

Instead, the editor has likely assessed the paper, determined that it does not meet the journal's criteria for further review, and issued a desk rejection decision. This allows the journal to focus its resources on papers that are better aligned with their scope and quality standards.

While receiving a desk rejection can be disappointing, it provides valuable feedback to the author. They can then assess the reasons for the rejection, make necessary revisions, and potentially resubmit the paper to a more suitable journal. Understanding the significance of a "Decision in Process" status is a key part of the publishing process.

What to Do After Desk Rejection

If a paper receives a desk rejection, all hope is not lost. There are several potential paths forward. One possibility is a "reject and resubmit" decision, indicating that the paper could be a good candidate for publication after substantial revisions. Editors might also direct the manuscript to a special issue or a sister journal where it may find a better fit. After receiving a desk rejection from a journal, there are several constructive steps authors can take to move forward:

1. Understand the Reasons for Rejection:

 Review the editor's feedback carefully, if provided, to understand the specific reasons the paper was desk rejected. This could include issues with the scope, methodology, presentation, or overall quality of the work.

2. Assess the Viability of the Research:

Evaluate whether the research itself is still valuable and worth pursuing, even if the current manuscript was not accepted. Consider if the findings could be strengthened or the work expanded upon.

3. Revise and Improve the Manuscript:

Use the feedback from the desk rejection to identify areas for improvement in the manuscript. Incorporate revisions to address the editor's concerns, and enhance the clarity and quality of the work.

4. Identify Alternative Journal Options:

Research other journals that may be a better fit for the refined manuscript. Look for journals with a scope, focus, and audience that align more closely with the paper's content and contributions.

5. Resubmit to a New Target Journal:

Once the manuscript has been improved, consider resubmitting it to a different, more suitable journal. Be sure to carefully follow the new journal's submission guidelines.

6. Seek Additional Feedback:

Consider sharing the revised manuscript with colleagues, mentors, or peers to obtain additional feedback and suggestions for improvement before resubmitting.

Understand that desk rejections are a common part of the publication process and do not necessarily reflect the overall quality or value of the research. Approach the revisions and resubmission with determination and resilience.

Desk rejection is not necessarily a negative outcome. It can save authors time by avoiding a lengthy review process that may not result in publication. It's an opportunity to regroup, refine the paper, and consider alternative publishing avenues.