Reply
Thu 2 May, 2013 08:56 pm
Does it imply that the quality of the manuscript has not matched that of the other articles recently submitted to us"?
Context:
Dear Dr **,
Thank you for allowing us to review your manuscript \"**\", which has undergone peer review. Comments from the peer review process can be found below.
Unfortunately, the comments indicate that as it stands, your manuscript could not successfully compete for space with other articles recently submitted to us. As it necessitates what the editorial office considers significant revision, we cannot consider your article as it stands for publication in Molecular Psychiatry.
If you choose to substantially revise the paper according to the reviewer comments below, you may resubmit it to Molecular Psychiatry. However, bearing in mind the nature of the reviewer comments, should you choose to resubmit a revision, acceptance is not guaranteed. The editorial office will review the resubmission and decide on a case-by-case basis whether to pursue consideration further.
Sincerely,
@oristarA,
It means thanks, but no thanks.
More precisely, the submission did not meet the publishing standards. Presumably the publication has only so much space and this article couldn't compete or didn't compare to the other better written manuscripts, it wasn't worthy of being published, as it needed significant revision.
@oristarA,
It has either been turned down because of the poor quality of the writing or the poor quality of the research.
The answer will likely be found in the reviewer comments.
oristarA wrote:However, bearing in mind the nature of the reviewer comments, should you choose to resubmit a revision, acceptance is not guaranteed.
Selected Answer
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace