A guide to handling rejection

All authors get some form of rejection from a journal at some point in their careers. Do you amend the paper, based on the feedback, and resubmit, or do you go back to the drawing board? Do you want some guidance on what to do? Why not get some ideas from our in depth guide? 

For example, we advise you should discuss feedback with your co-authors (if applicable) and decide on your next steps. Getting past the journal’s editorial gatekeeper can be a lottery, most papers being rejected outright, never getting sent out for peer review. Therefore, if you have received comments from referees it is worth considering whether you should stick with your original choice of journal as you already have a foot in the door. If you do resubmit you should review carefully the wording of the Editor’s letter; often its language indicates whether they feel that you should revise and resubmit your work or submit it elsewhere. 

What do you do when an editor offers you the opportunity to resubmit but requires first that you perform additional work? Can make all the required changes, do you have the budget to add more experiments? You’ll have to work through these issues yourself but our schematic might help you decide. We also provide some ideas on developing rebuttals along with insights from our editorial team and a host of links to useful resources.