Assume I am submitting my paper to Journal X, which rejected the paper. After making modifications I am going to submit the paper to Journal X again. At the same time can I also submit the paper to another Journal Y (which has a lower impact factor than Journal X). As the Journal X has rejected it the first time, I think it may be rejected again. So I want to publish my work anyhow in a journal.
121147
The two journals I am considering for my paper each demand that the paper be submitted exclusively to their journal for consideration.  What do I win if I don’t keep this rule?   If I get rejected by both, I will have found out earlier that the paper is not worthy of publication. If I get accepted by one of the journals, this is very good. I will have found out faster which of the two journals is willing to publish me. If I get accepted by both, this is really a dream. I should probably find a reason (excuse) to withdraw the publication from one of them.    In any case how can submitting to two journals negatively impact my reputation more than the gain by being actually accepted? (More so considering I will probably leave academia after my PhD dissertation.)  What can I lose if I don’t adhere to this rule? What sanctions, if any, can I expect?
29055
This is related to but not answered in .  After an author has submitted a manuscript to a journal for peer-review, very often the journal asks the author to revise (and resubmit) the manuscript as a precondition for its publication. I am wondering whether the term preprint refers to the manuscript before or after its authors made these revisions.  If a preprint includes revisions made in response to peer review, then there is only a slight difference, mostly regarding layout and style, between the preprint and the article that is published in the journal. From a reader’s perspective, there would be no point in paying for access to the article, since they can simply download the preprint free of charge. A publisher would probably want to prevent their authors (by publication agreements etc.) from publishing preprints that differ from the respective journal article only in form.  As a side question, what kind of preprints do publishers tolerate, as a rule?
71670
Around 3 months ago, I submitted a paper to a Math journal for peer-review through an online submission system. The same day I received in my e-mail an acknowledgement saying that the paper had been received.  The problem is that the status of the paper on the online submission system is still "Manuscript submitted".  I think this means that the paper has not even been assigned to an editor yet (once this happens, the editor will probably start looking for reviewers), but as far as I know submissions are assigned to editors within a few weeks (I once submitted a paper to another journal and when an editor had been assigned, the status on the online system changed to "Editor handles" or something like that).  I know that publishing is a long and complicated process and I'm not trying to rush anybody, but sometimes manuscripts are lost in the system. In fact, this has once happened to me, so I just want to make sure that the paper was not lost in the system.  Should I send an e-mail asking for the status of the paper?  PS: I think that, at the time of submitting the paper, I didn't choose any specific editor to submit the paper to.
4555
Call it stupidity or bad luck but I am guilty of submitting my research article to a journal which is listed in .  It is my first article and I don't have much experience publishing articles. I was searching for a top impact factor journal and found this one on Google and in excitement sent my article (word and pdf files) in this journal a few days ago, only to discover later that this might be a bogus journal.  Now I am worried about that what will happen to my article. What if they plagiarize my paper, or send it to another journal not giving me credit?   My question is that what should I do now? Should I send my article to a reputable journal now? What should be the process? What if it is flagged for fraud by that journal? What are my options?  Any help would be appreciated.
47645
I submitted my paper in IEEE Transcations of XXX and got a rejection. But the comments were really helpful and has helped me a lot in improving the paper. But, unfortunately, I cannot resubmit that paper to this same journal again and now I am looking for another journal.   I am writing a proper response again every comment and thinking to submit the response letter as part of the submission to the new journal. The basic idea is to let the reviewers know that this paper has been reviewed (by reviewers of another journal) and improvements has been made. Will it somehow improve the chances of acceptance. (as I am in the final stages of my PhD now)  What does the community say?
69531
I submitted a paper to an applied mathematics journal. I have since found a way to generalize one of the results.  Is it acceptable to update the paper during the first review step even if I have not been requested to improve on this particular aspect?  I understand that this would create extra work for the reviewers since they would have to check that part again. However, writing a brand new paper with the additional result would probably cause even more extra work for the review community. I also understand that a dissemination strategy that incorporates some salami slicing might be better for my career, but somehow I am opposed to doing that kind of thing.
118773
I was thinking about submitting one of my papers in  or  and hence I was just wondering if mentioning the same in my CV would be appropriate. Is it done usually? If yes, how should I actually mention something like this in my CV? Kindly guide me (I have no previous experience in publishing papers and I'm an undergraduate student).
47089
I'm aware that some institutions offer something that is called 'Thesis by Publication' (sandwich thesis) but that's not available to me. I'm trying to work out what pitfalls there may be to simply copying from papers that I have previously published in order to form large sections of my thesis.  The papers that I've published were largely designed to solve major problems encountered within the larger frame of research, so altogether they should follow a single coherent line of thought.  Must one's own work be cited in a thesis? This would be standard when submitting a paper for publication, but there is a stipulation when publishing papers that that work has not been already published elsewhere, and the same sort of thing does not really crop up with a thesis, does it?  Are there any other potentially pitfalls in this course of action?
85063
For conferences that "peer review" and "publish" full papers, when, if ever, can you resubmit essentially unchanged versions for publication in a peer reviewed journal?  In my field, when conference papers appear as book chapters, people often "republish" them as journal articles.  I have just had a talk accepted at a conference which is now (decided post submission) planning on publishing the proceedings as a special issue of a journal. It appears the journal is complete crap with an extremely light peer review process in general, no impact factor, and essentially not indexed. I think this "article" will be worthless, but I am concerned that I will not be able to republish the results in a respectable journal.
77690
What's the best way to make corrections to a published paper? Should I amend the original paper and mention in a footnote (or similar) what was changed and why or prepare a completely separate document and put that on my website/append it to the original paper?  I'm not so much worried about how to get it to the publishers that handle the paper, but rather about how to go about it. I would especially like to hear from people who have done something like that or know someone who did.
76085
If I presented a poster at a conference that contained the results of some research, can I then write a paper using those same results and submit it to another conference as a full paper?
61092
Suppose I write a paper and submit it to a conference. The paper gets some weak rejects and weak accepts and lots of criticism, but the conference is not that prestigious, so they accept it anyway.  Obviously, if I agree with the reviews, I will want to change the paper (which is in part what the reviews are for). But how far can I go with these changes? If the paper is computer science, for instance, I may easily run additional experiments, or slightly change the setup and re-run the existing experiments. If I submit the paper with these results, I will basically be publishing experiments that have not, in their current form, been peer-reviewed.  At what point do changes to a submitted paper post peer review become unacceptable?
50185
I did my PhD four years back. I was funded from my home country and I have done all the work. I started writing papers before submitting my thesis.  I am sending my supervisor drafts every year until now. Altogether I have now done 32 drafts. Since last year alone, I have rewritten my paper 12 times but he still is not happy to submit it and not willing to make any changes by himself. He is even not letting me to show it to the reviewers.  My supervisor is a lecturer and I was his first PhD student. I acquired the opinion of two professors (one of them is my 2nd supervisor and is a co-author) recently about the quaility of paper and they recommended to send it to a good journal (impact factor of 10 and above). After many years of struggle my supervisor wished to publish it in a journal with an impact factor less than 1. Above all he is not willing to pay publication costs and he is not allowing me to try for good journal. I am the one who did all the work, who paid for work, who wrote paper and who is paying for publication costs and i am not allowed to try any good journal.  One thing about his recomened changes: He did not ask repeating any experiments, redoing any analysis or revisiting any conclusions. It’s only text style that is being changed over last four years.  I contacted the university services and they told me that I don’t qualify for university help as they only cover two years post PhD duration.   What can I do now? Can I publish my work without him as co author. Can I just acknowlege him for hosting me and remove his name from the author list?
98666
Every journal has strict rules about duplicate submissions, and I do not mean publishing the paper in 2 venues.  My approach is mostly from an economics point of view: Given the fact that most reviews take between 2-3 months, plus any number of months for a resubmission, limiting yourself to only one journal seems not only a waste of time for the individual, but an overall drag for the scientific community. Even if you make a groundbreaking discovery, it won't get published until about a year later.  Multiple submissions dramatically increase the chances of getting your work published, and if you get accepted in both, you can always pull out your paper. From a marketplace point of view, this makes sense, since in this way, journals would be fighting for authors and not the other way around.   Models like Arxiv have proven that this is not such a crazy idea
74892
I received a journal paper for a review. The paper suggests a solution to an important problem, but the solution is very complicated and has mediocre performance. While reading the paper, I thought of a different solution, which is much simpler and has better performance (to give some scale: their solution is 1 page to write and 5 pages to prove; my solution is 5 lines to write and half a page to prove).  What should I do now?  A. Write my solution in the review, hoping the authors will remember to "thank the anonymous reviewer"?  B. Recommend that the paper published as is, then write a paper of my own with my improved solution?  C. Something else?  EDIT: Before I found the superior solution, I thought of recommending "resubmit with major revision", with the reasons that I mentioned above: your solution is too complicated and its performance is too weak.  However, now I am not sure it is the good course of action. A major revision may take a long time. The authors might even decide to delay or stop working on the paper without telling the editor (or me). Meanwhile, I will have to postpone the publishing of the superior solution for an indefinite amount of time. What do you think?
10123
My first advisor wants me to include my second advisor's name in a paper that I worked on before she (2nd advisor) came along.   Should I include her name even though she didn't do anything in that paper? I don't think she even read it.
34682
I submitted a paper to an Elsevier journal in August and the status has been "with editor" ever since. I was concerned that it had not been sent for review for 4 months and I sent inquiries twice without getting any response. I am wondering if I should just withdraw my paper?