Mixing
Do journals allow me to modify contents of a paper?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Suppose I sent a research paper to a well reputed journal. I try to prove a novel theorem in my paper using some lemmas. What if the reviewers find that the theorem is correct but some part of the proof or few lemmas I wrote in the paper are erroneous or not up to the mark? I mean cases where the error is not significant, but exist because I am a beginner to the field.
My question is will they ask me for a correction and wait till I send it to them or will they identify where I went wrong and help me in publishing? Will they simply reject the paper because the proof is amateur ?
journals
edited Aug 9 at 23:19
SecretAgentMan
4559
asked Aug 9 at 20:55
hind
633414
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Suppose I sent a research paper to a well reputed journal. I try to prove a novel theorem in my paper using some lemmas. What if the reviewers find that the theorem is correct but some part of the proof or few lemmas I wrote in the paper are erroneous or not up to the mark? I mean cases where the error is not significant, but exist because I am a beginner to the field.
My question is will they ask me for a correction and wait till I send it to them or will they identify where I went wrong and help me in publishing? Will they simply reject the paper because the proof is amateur ?
journals
edited Aug 9 at 23:19
SecretAgentMan
4559
asked Aug 9 at 20:55
hind
633414
1
They won't wait for you. The reviewers will read what you send and make comments back to the editor. See the answers for more. If you find errors you can notify the editor, but it might slow down the review process. Normally it is good to inform them.
– Buffy
Aug 9 at 21:17
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Suppose I sent a research paper to a well reputed journal. I try to prove a novel theorem in my paper using some lemmas. What if the reviewers find that the theorem is correct but some part of the proof or few lemmas I wrote in the paper are erroneous or not up to the mark? I mean cases where the error is not significant, but exist because I am a beginner to the field.
My question is will they ask me for a correction and wait till I send it to them or will they identify where I went wrong and help me in publishing? Will they simply reject the paper because the proof is amateur ?
journals
edited Aug 9 at 23:19
SecretAgentMan
4559
asked Aug 9 at 20:55
hind
633414
Suppose I sent a research paper to a well reputed journal. I try to prove a novel theorem in my paper using some lemmas. What if the reviewers find that the theorem is correct but some part of the proof or few lemmas I wrote in the paper are erroneous or not up to the mark? I mean cases where the error is not significant, but exist because I am a beginner to the field.
My question is will they ask me for a correction and wait till I send it to them or will they identify where I went wrong and help me in publishing? Will they simply reject the paper because the proof is amateur ?
journals
edited Aug 9 at 23:19
SecretAgentMan
4559
asked Aug 9 at 20:55
hind
633414
edited Aug 9 at 23:19
SecretAgentMan
4559
edited Aug 9 at 23:19
SecretAgentMan
4559
edited Aug 9 at 23:19
SecretAgentMan
4559
4559
asked Aug 9 at 20:55
hind
633414
asked Aug 9 at 20:55
hind
633414
asked Aug 9 at 20:55
hind
633414
633414
1
They won't wait for you. The reviewers will read what you send and make comments back to the editor. See the answers for more. If you find errors you can notify the editor, but it might slow down the review process. Normally it is good to inform them.
– Buffy
Aug 9 at 21:17
add a comment |Â
1
They won't wait for you. The reviewers will read what you send and make comments back to the editor. See the answers for more. If you find errors you can notify the editor, but it might slow down the review process. Normally it is good to inform them.
– Buffy
Aug 9 at 21:17
1
1
They won't wait for you. The reviewers will read what you send and make comments back to the editor. See the answers for more. If you find errors you can notify the editor, but it might slow down the review process. Normally it is good to inform them.
– Buffy
Aug 9 at 21:17
They won't wait for you. The reviewers will read what you send and make comments back to the editor. See the answers for more. If you find errors you can notify the editor, but it might slow down the review process. Normally it is good to inform them.
– Buffy
Aug 9 at 21:17
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
11
down vote
accepted
If the reviewers feel that the paper generally has merit, but is in need of certain reasonable corrections or revisions, they will often write a list of specific changes or improvements that are needed, and recommend acceptance subject to those revisions. This is what people mean when they talk about getting a "minor revisions" or "major revisions" decision on their paper.
Another possibility is "revise and resubmit", where the reviewers aren't convinced whether the paper has merit, or if the errors are fixable, but they explain their concerns and are willing to take another look if you're able to fix the paper to address them.
If they doubt that the paper can be salvaged, or if they don't think the results are interesting enough even if they were corrected, or the paper is generally not up to an appropriate level of rigor and clarity, it'll be rejected. In this case they may not give you very detailed feedback. After all, their goal is to help get good papers published, and if they don't think your paper is ever going to get there, why should they spend time on it?
Generally, it isn't the reviewer's job to help you write a good paper, and you can't use the peer review process as a substitute for your own learning.
answered Aug 9 at 21:10
Nate Eldredge
96k27266371
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
11
down vote
accepted
If the reviewers feel that the paper generally has merit, but is in need of certain reasonable corrections or revisions, they will often write a list of specific changes or improvements that are needed, and recommend acceptance subject to those revisions. This is what people mean when they talk about getting a "minor revisions" or "major revisions" decision on their paper.
Another possibility is "revise and resubmit", where the reviewers aren't convinced whether the paper has merit, or if the errors are fixable, but they explain their concerns and are willing to take another look if you're able to fix the paper to address them.
If they doubt that the paper can be salvaged, or if they don't think the results are interesting enough even if they were corrected, or the paper is generally not up to an appropriate level of rigor and clarity, it'll be rejected. In this case they may not give you very detailed feedback. After all, their goal is to help get good papers published, and if they don't think your paper is ever going to get there, why should they spend time on it?
Generally, it isn't the reviewer's job to help you write a good paper, and you can't use the peer review process as a substitute for your own learning.
answered Aug 9 at 21:10
Nate Eldredge
96k27266371
add a comment |Â
up vote
11
down vote
accepted
If the reviewers feel that the paper generally has merit, but is in need of certain reasonable corrections or revisions, they will often write a list of specific changes or improvements that are needed, and recommend acceptance subject to those revisions. This is what people mean when they talk about getting a "minor revisions" or "major revisions" decision on their paper.
Another possibility is "revise and resubmit", where the reviewers aren't convinced whether the paper has merit, or if the errors are fixable, but they explain their concerns and are willing to take another look if you're able to fix the paper to address them.
If they doubt that the paper can be salvaged, or if they don't think the results are interesting enough even if they were corrected, or the paper is generally not up to an appropriate level of rigor and clarity, it'll be rejected. In this case they may not give you very detailed feedback. After all, their goal is to help get good papers published, and if they don't think your paper is ever going to get there, why should they spend time on it?
Generally, it isn't the reviewer's job to help you write a good paper, and you can't use the peer review process as a substitute for your own learning.
answered Aug 9 at 21:10
Nate Eldredge
96k27266371
add a comment |Â
up vote
11
down vote
accepted
up vote
11
down vote
accepted
If the reviewers feel that the paper generally has merit, but is in need of certain reasonable corrections or revisions, they will often write a list of specific changes or improvements that are needed, and recommend acceptance subject to those revisions. This is what people mean when they talk about getting a "minor revisions" or "major revisions" decision on their paper.
Another possibility is "revise and resubmit", where the reviewers aren't convinced whether the paper has merit, or if the errors are fixable, but they explain their concerns and are willing to take another look if you're able to fix the paper to address them.
If they doubt that the paper can be salvaged, or if they don't think the results are interesting enough even if they were corrected, or the paper is generally not up to an appropriate level of rigor and clarity, it'll be rejected. In this case they may not give you very detailed feedback. After all, their goal is to help get good papers published, and if they don't think your paper is ever going to get there, why should they spend time on it?
Generally, it isn't the reviewer's job to help you write a good paper, and you can't use the peer review process as a substitute for your own learning.
answered Aug 9 at 21:10
Nate Eldredge
96k27266371
If the reviewers feel that the paper generally has merit, but is in need of certain reasonable corrections or revisions, they will often write a list of specific changes or improvements that are needed, and recommend acceptance subject to those revisions. This is what people mean when they talk about getting a "minor revisions" or "major revisions" decision on their paper.
Another possibility is "revise and resubmit", where the reviewers aren't convinced whether the paper has merit, or if the errors are fixable, but they explain their concerns and are willing to take another look if you're able to fix the paper to address them.
If they doubt that the paper can be salvaged, or if they don't think the results are interesting enough even if they were corrected, or the paper is generally not up to an appropriate level of rigor and clarity, it'll be rejected. In this case they may not give you very detailed feedback. After all, their goal is to help get good papers published, and if they don't think your paper is ever going to get there, why should they spend time on it?
Generally, it isn't the reviewer's job to help you write a good paper, and you can't use the peer review process as a substitute for your own learning.
answered Aug 9 at 21:10
Nate Eldredge
96k27266371
edited Aug 9 at 21:18
answered Aug 9 at 21:10
Nate Eldredge
96k27266371
answered Aug 9 at 21:10
Nate Eldredge
96k27266371
answered Aug 9 at 21:10
Nate Eldredge
96k27266371
96k27266371
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f115075%2fdo-journals-allow-me-to-modify-contents-of-a-paper%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
1
They won't wait for you. The reviewers will read what you send and make comments back to the editor. See the answers for more. If you find errors you can notify the editor, but it might slow down the review process. Normally it is good to inform them.
– Buffy
Aug 9 at 21:17