peer-review taking over 1 year

[delsur]

Hi everyone,

This is a frequent topic, I know, but I much need to vent and seek some of your wise advice. 13 months ago, I submitted a paper to a journal that is among the top in my subfield in literature. After 10 months, I got a revise and resubmit with positive reviews and requests for very specific changes. It's now been more than 3 months since I submitted the revisions and 1 week since I asked for a status update. Communication is handled by an editorial assistant, who is not a graduate student doing this part time, and who has already ignored a couple of my queries regarding specific guidelines.

   Is quietly waiting the best option here? (Some friends of mine are convinced that asking for status updates triggers rejections)
   Should I contact one of the editors directly for a status update?
   Am I being unreasonable in light of the ongoing pandemic and expected delays?

Thank you in advance for your insights.

[Parasaurolophus]

Hi everyone,

This is a frequent topic, I know, but I much need to vent and seek some of your wise advice. 13 months ago, I submitted a paper to a journal that is among the top in my subfield in literature. After 10 months, I got a revise and resubmit with positive reviews and requests for very specific changes. It's now been more than 3 months since I submitted the revisions and 1 week since I asked for a status update. Communication is handled by an editorial assistant, who is not a graduate student doing this part time, and who has already ignored a couple of my queries regarding specific guidelines.

   Is quietly waiting the best option here? (Some friends of mine are convinced that asking for status updates triggers rejections)
   Should I contact one of the editors directly for a status update?
   Am I being unreasonable in light of the ongoing pandemic and expected delays?

Thank you in advance for your insights.

I usually figure that an R&R will take about as long to receive as the initial verdict took (although frankly, as someone who's refereed quite a bit and always does so quickly, I don't see why).

My impression is that forcing an editor's hand tends to lead to rejection. And since you already have the R&R, your chances of acceptance are pretty good, so if you want to publish in the journal, I'd tough it out. If you don't especially need the pub and feel like punishing them/being a bit of a jerk, you can send a note indicating that you're not withdrawing it, but you will be submitting it somewhere else simultaneously.

FWIW, I think that 13 months is an egregiously long time to wait. The initial ten months is where the problem lies, however. That's an unconscionably long period of time for an initial verdict. To my mind, 3 months is acceptable for a verdict at any stage (although after an R&R it really ought to be faster). So if it were me, I'd tough it out for another month or two.

One fancy journal is currently sitting on an R&Red paper of mine. It's been four months since I sent the revised paper, and they've apparently had the referee reports back for a month now. I don't know why they haven't given me a verdict yet, but I'm going to hang tight and wait for the response, because I very much want this paper to land there. I know loads of people who've had to wait a year or more for their verdicts, including one friend who waited three years for an initial acceptance.

[mamselle]

Sciences, or humanities?

A year isn't impossible for some humanities journals.

M.

[traductio]

A year in the humanities is longer than normal, but in your shoes, I'd stick it out. If you pull it and submit it elsewhere, you're looking at six months for a first review. If you keep it where it is, you're looking at less than that, with a better chance of acceptance this round.

ETA: My record is something like six years. I had totally moved on from the project when I got the R&R (at about the three year point, maybe four), and I had to remember what I was writing about at the time!

[saramago]

I agree, 3 months isn't that bad. Not great, but could be worse. The lack of response to your queries is, however annoying -- still, I wouldn't contact the editors just yet.

[Hibush]

I agree, 3 months isn't that bad. Not great, but could be worse. The lack of response to your queries is, however annoying -- still, I wouldn't contact the editors just yet.

3 months for a re-review is bad. But could be worse. The lack of response to your queries is unprofessional. I would curse the editors privately, though.

One lesson from stories like this is that in the humanities, where this kind of unprofessional treatment by journals is considered the norm, it is really worth having a conversation with the editor by telephone or video to understand their timeline. Shop around. Find a journal that treats your submission as if it is important.

[jerseyjay]

Whether you stick it out or switch journals depends on several things.

Do you have a deadline for tenure?
How important is it to publish in this journal?
Is your topic such that it would probably be sent to the same reviewers anyway?
How time-specific is your topic?
Are there other researchers who are planning to publish something similar to you?

If your topic is relatively obscure and timeless and you have no urgent career deadline and the journal is respected than I would be inclined to wait. (And in the interim, put the paper out of your mind and work on other projects.) If you are up for tenure soon, your topic has a sell-by date, or the journal is not that good to begin with, I would think about switching.

Your experience is in the annoying end of the spectrum, but it is not rare. I submitted a paper to a top journal, which then had it under review for a year, only to tell me that it was not a good fit, and no other feedback (it was later published elsewhere). I had a paper under review for a top journal for more than a year; the editor was apologetic, but two reviewers had flaked and he needed a second reviewer (who ended up writing, more or less, "good paper" with no useful comments). I have also had some experiences where is accepted and in print in less than three months, which is much rarer.

On the other hand, I once got an R&R from a top journal, and was unable to get back to it because I was working on my first book. More than a year later I asked if I could still resubmit and the editor said yes, and it was accepted within a month.

Peer review is inefficient, slow, and based on people doing it for nothing amid all their other responsibilities. Given everything else that is happening in the world, and the fact that it is summer, it might take longer than one would like.

[Myword]

 I am waiting almost a year now for the first decision! Journal could not find reviewers for article. And the subject is widely known and respected. So I am assuming answer is a big no. Am very annoyed, as this is, by far, the longest time I waited. One journal took only 3 weeks for another paper. I doubt that COVID is the reason; maybe an excuse. Meanwhile, I noticed that first journal published 2 articles outside of their scope  entirely. Why, I have no idea. A procrastinated decision usually means the decision-maker is apathetic about it, yes?

[jerseyjay]

As has been indicated the norms for fields are very different, so I cannot really say what this means for your field. In history, a delay of months or even a year is not unheard of, even before covid.

That said, a delay could be a sign of apathy. It could also be a sign of problems or disarray that are not related to your paper. It is likely that Covid had something to do with it--if not directly, than indirectly. Maybe the editor or a reader or a member of one of their families fell ill with Covid. Maybe they are struggling with teaching online. I am not sure I read too much into a delay other than that it is delayed.

[writingprof]

Find a journal that treats your submission as if it is important.

"As if" is the operative phrase, as no work in the humanities is actually important.  My experience is that journal editors in the humanities and their unpaid laborers work exactly as hard as I would in their shoes.

[Myword]

I wish they would just follow the Golden Rule, but that is too much to ask?

[mamselle]

Find a journal that treats your submission as if it is important.

"As if" is the operative phrase, as no work in the humanities is actually important.  My experience is that journal editors in the humanities and their unpaid laborers work exactly as hard as I would in their shoes.

Snark? Or serious?

Hard to tell...

M.

[secundem_artem]

Editor here.

Polite requests to clarify the status of a paper are reasonable and, in my experience, delays are usually a function of my inability to find reviewers and/or reviewers dragging their feet.  On the other hand, I received this little gem the other day for a paper that has been in the system for only 6 weeks:

Dear Editor,
I hope this email finds you good in health and same expected for your beloved family. I being the Principal author of my Manuscript ''Basket weaving while tap dancing'' is requesting you to make possible for fast review and requesting to accept the Manuscript for publication so I can be able to initiate my thesis submission which is hindering the progress of my academic career.
Thanking you in anticipation.

As noted up thread, the fastest way to get a rejection is to act like some special snowflake and demand rapid action.  Clarifications and updates are fine.  Hurry the f up because I need a quick pub?  Not so much.

[Ruralguy]

Some journals/publishers have expedited processes for people who "need" a publication. I don't think they really put pressure on anyone, its more about just putting you at front of the queue.

In any case, yeah, a request for an update every few months seems reasonable, but unless you have no other options in your field, I'd be inclined to withdraw it or tell them you are submitting elsewhere after a year or so.

However, I do hear from my friends and enemies in the humanities that certain fields take *years* to publish articles. If its a field that also takes books, go for a book, because they can probably take *less* time!

if its something like econ, business, psych, other STEM stuff,  just try to find another journal (after a year or whatever you think is reasonable in your field).

[Myword]

My guess is that if they know of you and your esteemed work, you would be treated better, front of the line.  Seems harder now that graduate students and more foreign scholars are writing for English language journals. Was not like that many years ago.

Really, how long does it take to read a 15-20 page article? And a cursory read at that.