1

I have written a manuscript and sent it to a journal. Right now they are reviewing my manuscript. In the meantime I have rewritten the manuscript due to mistakes, and now it is entirely new, in the sense that the method and the conclusion are new.

Should I submit this new version of the manuscript to the journal? Or just find another journal to submit? I am afraid the referee will not read my new manuscript because they have spent lots of effort studying the old one but they gain nothing. How should I proceed?

3
  • 5
    I think this is a question best asked to the editor, and as soon as possible to not waste any more reviewer time.
    – Sursula
    Oct 19, 2022 at 7:02
  • "the method and the conclusion are new". I wonder how you could keep the introduction and the discussion, as well as the results, but I am a nit-picker.
    – EarlGrey
    Oct 20, 2022 at 7:52
  • How much time passed since the first submission?
    – EarlGrey
    Oct 20, 2022 at 7:53

2 Answers 2

5

At the very least, you should retract your paper asap because of mistakes. Even if the editor is for-profit (e.g. Elsevier, Springer), the reviewers are usually volunteers and you are wasting their time.

If I were an editor receiving an update like this, I would be miffed. You did not check your manuscript sufficiently before submission and now you are submitting again. But I would appreciate your honesty in admitting the mistake, which might allow me to not desk-reject the second submission.

I would recommend you send a very apologetic letter to the editor with your new version, assuring the editor that you did check the new version over and over again. People make mistakes and can be forgiven for making mistakes.

4

Ask the editor how to proceed. They can probably respond fairly quickly after consulting with any reviewers. You will need to assure them that the new "version" is better than the old and clears up deficiencies. Maybe outline the changes. If the result is improved, indicate that.

The alternative of waiting for a decision seems worse in many regards. If the decision is to reject, they may not be interested in a new version. If it is to accept then you have a real dilemma.

But by getting the editor involved you may save reviewers some fruitless work and also get a better chance for success.

You must log in to answer this question.

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