Skip to main content

Timeline for Journal review failure

Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0

4 events
when toggle format what by license comment
May 29, 2018 at 23:55 comment added jakebeal If your correspondence is with the EIC and you are certain you are dealing with a good journal, I would still withdraw, giving a clear statement of why. Bungling at this level and refusal to fix it taints the whole review process, and if they can't fix it, I would reconsider their reputation. Maybe requesting to withdraw will get their attention and they will fix things. If it doesn't, I still say you are better off taking your work elsewhere.
May 29, 2018 at 23:49 comment added doctorer All my correspondence has been to the EIC, as he was handling the paper according to the website. Part way through this process, a new EIC was appointed and I continued my one-sided correspondence with her. This is a highly reputable journal in my field, there is no question of that. I presume the mix up is at the journal rather than with the individual reviewers.
May 29, 2018 at 23:47 comment added Allure I upvoted but I think some of your conclusions are premature, e.g. a predatory journal is not likely to take six weeks to provide three reviews, especially if some of them are detailed reviews (even if they're for the wrong paper). The journal publisher is also not likely to say "we've forwarded your email to the editor", and besides there's no indication this is an OA paper. I agree with the suggestion though - escalate to the EiC.
May 29, 2018 at 23:23 history answered jakebeal CC BY-SA 4.0