1

I submitted a paper last month in a reputable high ranking journal, the paper was rejected with a chance of resubmission, the reviewer pointed out some anomalies in my data analysis and stated that my work can't be considered for publication. I run the experiments all over, and plotted new graphs. Do you think I should resubmit to the same journal? Are the reviewers going to question my new data? Is there anyone here who went through running the experiment again, finding new data and resubmitting to the same journal and got accepted for publication?

2
  • 8
    Well, have you questioned your new (and old) data to understand what the differences are? Always be the worst critic of your work.
    – Jon Custer
    Jun 16 at 13:33
  • 1
    Well, have you carefully read and addressed all the reviewer comments? Nov 13 at 17:46

1 Answer 1

0

If you are sure you've improved the paper and its underlying data, you should probably resubmit, since they permit it. That would probably be the quickest way to get feedback on whether you have something worth publishing. Even if it is again rejected, the reasons may change which will give you further advice on how to proceed. Submitting to a different journal would start you at the beginning again and take longer in most cases.

Provide a note along with the resubmission explaining what you have done and why it correctly responds to the earlier review.

But don't waste people's efforts. Make careful evaluation yourself or within your working group.

2
  • Can it happen that the reviewers of a journal deny further re-submissions if they feel that someone has not put enough effort in working on the changes they requested? Guess it depends on the reviewer but do you know if it has already happened?
    – sam
    Nov 13 at 20:08
  • 1
    @sam Reviewers don't have that sort of power. They give advice to the editor. And it is hard to judge "effort" in any case. The question for the reviewer is to recommend publishing or not to the editor and to give advice to the authors for improvement. Authors are also often expected to detail changes to the paper making the reviewers job a bit easier.
    – Buffy
    Nov 13 at 20:21

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .