As researchers, we understand the anxiety that comes with submitting an article for publication. Once the paper has been submitted, authors are frequently left feeling anxious and perplexed by the different terminology used to characterise the status of their submission. The purpose of this article is to clarify the numerous terms used by publishers and editors to indicate the state of a manuscript.
Inconsistent Terminologies Used in Online Submission and Tracking Systems
As we progress towards more digital and efficient procedures, many journals now ask authors to submit their manuscripts using online submission platforms. While these technologies have made the submission process quicker and faster, they can also contribute to the uncertainty that writers may feel.
One particular source of confusion is the various terms used to describe the status of a submitted manuscript. Different journals may use different labels for manuscript status and this can be further compounded by the use of tracking systems allowing authors to monitor the progress of their manuscripts. These tracking systems may use different terminologies than the submission system, leading to further confusion.
For example, one journal may use the term "Under Review" to indicate that the manuscript is currently being evaluated by peer reviewers, while another journal may use "In Process". Similarly, one tracking system may use "Editor Assigned" to indicate that an editor has been assigned to the manuscript, while another system may use "Editor Review".
This inconsistency in terminology can leave authors feeling anxious and confused about the status of their manuscripts. To avoid this confusion, journals should strive to use clear and consistent terminology for manuscript status across their submission and tracking systems. Additionally, authors should also familiarize themselves with the specific terminology used by the target journal and seek clarification if they are unsure about the status of their manuscript.
Understanding the Changing Manuscript Statuses
Generally, manuscript status can be broadly classified into three categories: Submission, Review, and Decision.
In the Submission stage, the manuscript is received by the journal's editorial team and the author can track the status of their submission through the submission system. At this stage, the manuscript status can be described as ‘Manuscript submitted’, ‘Manuscript under consideration’, or ‘Manuscript received’.
In the Review stage, the manuscript is sent for peer review. The author may receive notifications when reviewers are invited and when editors are assigned to oversee the review process. The manuscript status can be described as ‘With reviewers’, ‘Under review’, ‘Undergoing peer review’, or ‘Under editorial consideration’.
In the Decision stage, the editor-in-chief or the editorial board makes a final decision based on the reviews received. The manuscript status can be described as ‘With Editor’, ‘With AE’, ‘Under AE Review’, ‘Awaiting decision’, ‘Decision in process’, ‘Decision made’, or ‘Manuscript accepted/rejected’.
It is worth noting that various journals may use different terminology for the same manuscript status. 'With Editor,' for example, may be dubbed 'Editorial Assessment' in some publications. Furthermore, certain journals may have additional particular status kinds, such as 'With Production,' 'In Typesetting,' or 'In Proofreading,' which are not included in the general categories stated previously.
General Estimated Timelines for Each Status Type
The manuscript submission and screening procedure might take anything from a few days to weeks and even months. Timelines for each status category may differ across journals and depend on a variety of circumstances such as the difficulty of the submission, the availability of reviewers, and the workload of the journal's editorial team.
The peer review process alone might take several weeks to conclude based on the number of reviewers needed and the complexity of the article. This is followed by the decision-making process which takes another couple of weeks depending on the editor's workload and the intricacy of the judgement. It is crucial to remember that these are estimations and real deadlines may differ amongst publications.
Thus, tracking the status of your manuscript and following up with journal editors when necessary is a crucial step in the publication process. Not only does it ensure that your manuscript is being handled in a timely manner, but it also allows you to communicate any concerns or questions you may have directly with the editor.
Remember, persistence and diligence can be the key to success in publishing scholarly work. So, don't be afraid to follow up and stay involved in the process. Keep pushing forward!
