Mixing
Paper rejected based on one very short wrong comment
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
My paper is rejected based on a wrong (I am almost certain that it is wrong) comment of a single reviewer and the content is as below
The manuscript focuses on the problem of "Some Technical Things". This problem has been solved in several papers of "Mr. X" : See, for example "This Article".
But "This Article" of "Mr. X" is totally different from what we have done. I don't know how I can show my objection to this unfair review that has wasted my time for two months!
I wrote a letter to the journal's editor but he did not respond (It has been 3 days).
Do you have any suggestions that one can do in such situations?
publications peer-review
edited 21 mins ago
Federico Poloni
23.6k1169125
asked 3 hours ago
H. R.
1848
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
My paper is rejected based on a wrong (I am almost certain that it is wrong) comment of a single reviewer and the content is as below
The manuscript focuses on the problem of "Some Technical Things". This problem has been solved in several papers of "Mr. X" : See, for example "This Article".
But "This Article" of "Mr. X" is totally different from what we have done. I don't know how I can show my objection to this unfair review that has wasted my time for two months!
I wrote a letter to the journal's editor but he did not respond (It has been 3 days).
Do you have any suggestions that one can do in such situations?
publications peer-review
edited 21 mins ago
Federico Poloni
23.6k1169125
asked 3 hours ago
H. R.
1848
5
Perhaps you should wait ie be patient, and give the editor more time to respond. He or she may have more urgent things to deal with at the moment and may be able to get around to your email in 5 or 10 days.
– Solar Mike
3 hours ago
@SolarMike: Thanks for the attention Mike. OK that seems reasonable. But what if I didn't get anything after 5 to 10 days?
– H. R.
3 hours ago
I'd recommend putting the word "unfairly" on a shelf. Your ms went through the same procedure as anyone else's, and came out on the wrong side of a decision. Chalk it up to experience, and use it to learn how to prevent this in future submissions.
– Scott Seidman
1 hour ago
@ScottSeidman: Thanks for the suggestion. Done. :) Yes, I got an experience which was very annoying for me! :D
– H. R.
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
My paper is rejected based on a wrong (I am almost certain that it is wrong) comment of a single reviewer and the content is as below
The manuscript focuses on the problem of "Some Technical Things". This problem has been solved in several papers of "Mr. X" : See, for example "This Article".
But "This Article" of "Mr. X" is totally different from what we have done. I don't know how I can show my objection to this unfair review that has wasted my time for two months!
I wrote a letter to the journal's editor but he did not respond (It has been 3 days).
Do you have any suggestions that one can do in such situations?
publications peer-review
edited 21 mins ago
Federico Poloni
23.6k1169125
asked 3 hours ago
H. R.
1848
My paper is rejected based on a wrong (I am almost certain that it is wrong) comment of a single reviewer and the content is as below
The manuscript focuses on the problem of "Some Technical Things". This problem has been solved in several papers of "Mr. X" : See, for example "This Article".
But "This Article" of "Mr. X" is totally different from what we have done. I don't know how I can show my objection to this unfair review that has wasted my time for two months!
I wrote a letter to the journal's editor but he did not respond (It has been 3 days).
Do you have any suggestions that one can do in such situations?
publications peer-review
publications peer-review
edited 21 mins ago
Federico Poloni
23.6k1169125
asked 3 hours ago
H. R.
1848
edited 21 mins ago
Federico Poloni
23.6k1169125
asked 3 hours ago
H. R.
1848
edited 21 mins ago
Federico Poloni
23.6k1169125
edited 21 mins ago
Federico Poloni
23.6k1169125
edited 21 mins ago
Federico Poloni
23.6k1169125
23.6k1169125
asked 3 hours ago
H. R.
1848
asked 3 hours ago
H. R.
1848
asked 3 hours ago
H. R.
1848
1848
5
Perhaps you should wait ie be patient, and give the editor more time to respond. He or she may have more urgent things to deal with at the moment and may be able to get around to your email in 5 or 10 days.
– Solar Mike
3 hours ago
@SolarMike: Thanks for the attention Mike. OK that seems reasonable. But what if I didn't get anything after 5 to 10 days?
– H. R.
3 hours ago
I'd recommend putting the word "unfairly" on a shelf. Your ms went through the same procedure as anyone else's, and came out on the wrong side of a decision. Chalk it up to experience, and use it to learn how to prevent this in future submissions.
– Scott Seidman
1 hour ago
@ScottSeidman: Thanks for the suggestion. Done. :) Yes, I got an experience which was very annoying for me! :D
– H. R.
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
5
Perhaps you should wait ie be patient, and give the editor more time to respond. He or she may have more urgent things to deal with at the moment and may be able to get around to your email in 5 or 10 days.
– Solar Mike
3 hours ago
@SolarMike: Thanks for the attention Mike. OK that seems reasonable. But what if I didn't get anything after 5 to 10 days?
– H. R.
3 hours ago
I'd recommend putting the word "unfairly" on a shelf. Your ms went through the same procedure as anyone else's, and came out on the wrong side of a decision. Chalk it up to experience, and use it to learn how to prevent this in future submissions.
– Scott Seidman
1 hour ago
@ScottSeidman: Thanks for the suggestion. Done. :) Yes, I got an experience which was very annoying for me! :D
– H. R.
1 hour ago
5
5
Perhaps you should wait ie be patient, and give the editor more time to respond. He or she may have more urgent things to deal with at the moment and may be able to get around to your email in 5 or 10 days.
– Solar Mike
3 hours ago
Perhaps you should wait ie be patient, and give the editor more time to respond. He or she may have more urgent things to deal with at the moment and may be able to get around to your email in 5 or 10 days.
– Solar Mike
3 hours ago
@SolarMike: Thanks for the attention Mike. OK that seems reasonable. But what if I didn't get anything after 5 to 10 days?
– H. R.
3 hours ago
@SolarMike: Thanks for the attention Mike. OK that seems reasonable. But what if I didn't get anything after 5 to 10 days?
– H. R.
3 hours ago
I'd recommend putting the word "unfairly" on a shelf. Your ms went through the same procedure as anyone else's, and came out on the wrong side of a decision. Chalk it up to experience, and use it to learn how to prevent this in future submissions.
– Scott Seidman
1 hour ago
I'd recommend putting the word "unfairly" on a shelf. Your ms went through the same procedure as anyone else's, and came out on the wrong side of a decision. Chalk it up to experience, and use it to learn how to prevent this in future submissions.
– Scott Seidman
1 hour ago
@ScottSeidman: Thanks for the suggestion. Done. :) Yes, I got an experience which was very annoying for me! :D
– H. R.
1 hour ago
@ScottSeidman: Thanks for the suggestion. Done. :) Yes, I got an experience which was very annoying for me! :D
– H. R.
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
6
down vote
accepted
- Wait. The editor has to assess if your claim is correct. People are busy. In addition, they may need to ask a more expert colleague for a quick opinion; this is not a full round of review, but still it will take several days. I would give them at least two weeks, personally (but publication times are heavily discipline-dependent).
- If the editor agrees with the reviewer, consider seriously the possibility that they are correct and you are wrong. Ask privately for another opinion to a collaborator/colleague you are in good terms with, just to understand where the truth lies.
- If you conclude that the referee is completely bonkers and their claim is ridiculously wrong, ignore their remark, submit somewhere else, and make a note for the future that this is not a good journal.
- If you conclude that the referee is wrong, but their one is a reasonable mis-interpretation and someone else may get it wrong, too, then revise your introduction: mention mr. X's papers and explain in your manuscript why they don't solve your problem. Then, submit somewhere else.
(Note that case 4 is much more common than case 3.)
answered 3 hours ago
Federico Poloni
23.6k1169125
(+1) Thanks Federico. :) I am certain that the referee's comment is wrong and it is far from mis-interpretation. But the journal is good and famous in the field! :/ I feel disrespected as they don't even care for our time!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
The comment is just about two lines and it took the reviewer to write it down in 6 weeks! Wow! and the worse thing is that the editor has not waited to know the opinion of another reviewer!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
3
@H.R. "it took the reviewer to write it down in 6 weeks! Wow!" Really? Consider that the reviewer is busy with their "Day job", that they had to read and follow your paper's arguments, check the references you provided and check the relevance and then you have the cheek to write "the comment is two lines and that took them 6 weeks"... You need to re-evaluate what you think...
– Solar Mike
3 hours ago
@SolarMike: Dear Mike, this is not a type of comment that needs evaluation of the manuscript! The paper that the reviewer has referred to is around 1980 and as you know reviewers are experts in the field and they almost know the literature. So if you know that some problem is solved previously then it should not take 6 weeks to realize it! :) It just take you to get such a thing by taking a glance!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
2
I wouldn't assume that the reviewer is such an expert in your field. Also, you say "even 2 hours". The average reviewer spends about half a day on a review. If you include interuptions thats say a solid 3 hours. In that time they have to check the validity of the whole thing, and get up to speed with the area if its related to their field, but not their precise expertise. "they don't even care for our time!". Get used to this. No one cares for your time. Particularly not when you are asking them to do you a favour (eg review your manuscript).
– Ian Sudbery
51 mins ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
6
down vote
accepted
- Wait. The editor has to assess if your claim is correct. People are busy. In addition, they may need to ask a more expert colleague for a quick opinion; this is not a full round of review, but still it will take several days. I would give them at least two weeks, personally (but publication times are heavily discipline-dependent).
- If the editor agrees with the reviewer, consider seriously the possibility that they are correct and you are wrong. Ask privately for another opinion to a collaborator/colleague you are in good terms with, just to understand where the truth lies.
- If you conclude that the referee is completely bonkers and their claim is ridiculously wrong, ignore their remark, submit somewhere else, and make a note for the future that this is not a good journal.
- If you conclude that the referee is wrong, but their one is a reasonable mis-interpretation and someone else may get it wrong, too, then revise your introduction: mention mr. X's papers and explain in your manuscript why they don't solve your problem. Then, submit somewhere else.
(Note that case 4 is much more common than case 3.)
answered 3 hours ago
Federico Poloni
23.6k1169125
(+1) Thanks Federico. :) I am certain that the referee's comment is wrong and it is far from mis-interpretation. But the journal is good and famous in the field! :/ I feel disrespected as they don't even care for our time!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
The comment is just about two lines and it took the reviewer to write it down in 6 weeks! Wow! and the worse thing is that the editor has not waited to know the opinion of another reviewer!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
3
@H.R. "it took the reviewer to write it down in 6 weeks! Wow!" Really? Consider that the reviewer is busy with their "Day job", that they had to read and follow your paper's arguments, check the references you provided and check the relevance and then you have the cheek to write "the comment is two lines and that took them 6 weeks"... You need to re-evaluate what you think...
– Solar Mike
3 hours ago
@SolarMike: Dear Mike, this is not a type of comment that needs evaluation of the manuscript! The paper that the reviewer has referred to is around 1980 and as you know reviewers are experts in the field and they almost know the literature. So if you know that some problem is solved previously then it should not take 6 weeks to realize it! :) It just take you to get such a thing by taking a glance!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
2
I wouldn't assume that the reviewer is such an expert in your field. Also, you say "even 2 hours". The average reviewer spends about half a day on a review. If you include interuptions thats say a solid 3 hours. In that time they have to check the validity of the whole thing, and get up to speed with the area if its related to their field, but not their precise expertise. "they don't even care for our time!". Get used to this. No one cares for your time. Particularly not when you are asking them to do you a favour (eg review your manuscript).
– Ian Sudbery
51 mins ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
6
down vote
accepted
- Wait. The editor has to assess if your claim is correct. People are busy. In addition, they may need to ask a more expert colleague for a quick opinion; this is not a full round of review, but still it will take several days. I would give them at least two weeks, personally (but publication times are heavily discipline-dependent).
- If the editor agrees with the reviewer, consider seriously the possibility that they are correct and you are wrong. Ask privately for another opinion to a collaborator/colleague you are in good terms with, just to understand where the truth lies.
- If you conclude that the referee is completely bonkers and their claim is ridiculously wrong, ignore their remark, submit somewhere else, and make a note for the future that this is not a good journal.
- If you conclude that the referee is wrong, but their one is a reasonable mis-interpretation and someone else may get it wrong, too, then revise your introduction: mention mr. X's papers and explain in your manuscript why they don't solve your problem. Then, submit somewhere else.
(Note that case 4 is much more common than case 3.)
answered 3 hours ago
Federico Poloni
23.6k1169125
(+1) Thanks Federico. :) I am certain that the referee's comment is wrong and it is far from mis-interpretation. But the journal is good and famous in the field! :/ I feel disrespected as they don't even care for our time!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
The comment is just about two lines and it took the reviewer to write it down in 6 weeks! Wow! and the worse thing is that the editor has not waited to know the opinion of another reviewer!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
3
@H.R. "it took the reviewer to write it down in 6 weeks! Wow!" Really? Consider that the reviewer is busy with their "Day job", that they had to read and follow your paper's arguments, check the references you provided and check the relevance and then you have the cheek to write "the comment is two lines and that took them 6 weeks"... You need to re-evaluate what you think...
– Solar Mike
3 hours ago
@SolarMike: Dear Mike, this is not a type of comment that needs evaluation of the manuscript! The paper that the reviewer has referred to is around 1980 and as you know reviewers are experts in the field and they almost know the literature. So if you know that some problem is solved previously then it should not take 6 weeks to realize it! :) It just take you to get such a thing by taking a glance!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
2
I wouldn't assume that the reviewer is such an expert in your field. Also, you say "even 2 hours". The average reviewer spends about half a day on a review. If you include interuptions thats say a solid 3 hours. In that time they have to check the validity of the whole thing, and get up to speed with the area if its related to their field, but not their precise expertise. "they don't even care for our time!". Get used to this. No one cares for your time. Particularly not when you are asking them to do you a favour (eg review your manuscript).
– Ian Sudbery
51 mins ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
6
down vote
accepted
up vote
6
down vote
accepted
- Wait. The editor has to assess if your claim is correct. People are busy. In addition, they may need to ask a more expert colleague for a quick opinion; this is not a full round of review, but still it will take several days. I would give them at least two weeks, personally (but publication times are heavily discipline-dependent).
- If the editor agrees with the reviewer, consider seriously the possibility that they are correct and you are wrong. Ask privately for another opinion to a collaborator/colleague you are in good terms with, just to understand where the truth lies.
- If you conclude that the referee is completely bonkers and their claim is ridiculously wrong, ignore their remark, submit somewhere else, and make a note for the future that this is not a good journal.
- If you conclude that the referee is wrong, but their one is a reasonable mis-interpretation and someone else may get it wrong, too, then revise your introduction: mention mr. X's papers and explain in your manuscript why they don't solve your problem. Then, submit somewhere else.
(Note that case 4 is much more common than case 3.)
answered 3 hours ago
Federico Poloni
23.6k1169125
- Wait. The editor has to assess if your claim is correct. People are busy. In addition, they may need to ask a more expert colleague for a quick opinion; this is not a full round of review, but still it will take several days. I would give them at least two weeks, personally (but publication times are heavily discipline-dependent).
- If the editor agrees with the reviewer, consider seriously the possibility that they are correct and you are wrong. Ask privately for another opinion to a collaborator/colleague you are in good terms with, just to understand where the truth lies.
- If you conclude that the referee is completely bonkers and their claim is ridiculously wrong, ignore their remark, submit somewhere else, and make a note for the future that this is not a good journal.
- If you conclude that the referee is wrong, but their one is a reasonable mis-interpretation and someone else may get it wrong, too, then revise your introduction: mention mr. X's papers and explain in your manuscript why they don't solve your problem. Then, submit somewhere else.
(Note that case 4 is much more common than case 3.)
answered 3 hours ago
Federico Poloni
23.6k1169125
answered 3 hours ago
Federico Poloni
23.6k1169125
answered 3 hours ago
Federico Poloni
23.6k1169125
answered 3 hours ago
Federico Poloni
23.6k1169125
23.6k1169125
(+1) Thanks Federico. :) I am certain that the referee's comment is wrong and it is far from mis-interpretation. But the journal is good and famous in the field! :/ I feel disrespected as they don't even care for our time!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
The comment is just about two lines and it took the reviewer to write it down in 6 weeks! Wow! and the worse thing is that the editor has not waited to know the opinion of another reviewer!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
3
@H.R. "it took the reviewer to write it down in 6 weeks! Wow!" Really? Consider that the reviewer is busy with their "Day job", that they had to read and follow your paper's arguments, check the references you provided and check the relevance and then you have the cheek to write "the comment is two lines and that took them 6 weeks"... You need to re-evaluate what you think...
– Solar Mike
3 hours ago
@SolarMike: Dear Mike, this is not a type of comment that needs evaluation of the manuscript! The paper that the reviewer has referred to is around 1980 and as you know reviewers are experts in the field and they almost know the literature. So if you know that some problem is solved previously then it should not take 6 weeks to realize it! :) It just take you to get such a thing by taking a glance!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
2
I wouldn't assume that the reviewer is such an expert in your field. Also, you say "even 2 hours". The average reviewer spends about half a day on a review. If you include interuptions thats say a solid 3 hours. In that time they have to check the validity of the whole thing, and get up to speed with the area if its related to their field, but not their precise expertise. "they don't even care for our time!". Get used to this. No one cares for your time. Particularly not when you are asking them to do you a favour (eg review your manuscript).
– Ian Sudbery
51 mins ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
(+1) Thanks Federico. :) I am certain that the referee's comment is wrong and it is far from mis-interpretation. But the journal is good and famous in the field! :/ I feel disrespected as they don't even care for our time!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
The comment is just about two lines and it took the reviewer to write it down in 6 weeks! Wow! and the worse thing is that the editor has not waited to know the opinion of another reviewer!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
3
@H.R. "it took the reviewer to write it down in 6 weeks! Wow!" Really? Consider that the reviewer is busy with their "Day job", that they had to read and follow your paper's arguments, check the references you provided and check the relevance and then you have the cheek to write "the comment is two lines and that took them 6 weeks"... You need to re-evaluate what you think...
– Solar Mike
3 hours ago
@SolarMike: Dear Mike, this is not a type of comment that needs evaluation of the manuscript! The paper that the reviewer has referred to is around 1980 and as you know reviewers are experts in the field and they almost know the literature. So if you know that some problem is solved previously then it should not take 6 weeks to realize it! :) It just take you to get such a thing by taking a glance!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
2
I wouldn't assume that the reviewer is such an expert in your field. Also, you say "even 2 hours". The average reviewer spends about half a day on a review. If you include interuptions thats say a solid 3 hours. In that time they have to check the validity of the whole thing, and get up to speed with the area if its related to their field, but not their precise expertise. "they don't even care for our time!". Get used to this. No one cares for your time. Particularly not when you are asking them to do you a favour (eg review your manuscript).
– Ian Sudbery
51 mins ago
(+1) Thanks Federico. :) I am certain that the referee's comment is wrong and it is far from mis-interpretation. But the journal is good and famous in the field! :/ I feel disrespected as they don't even care for our time!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
(+1) Thanks Federico. :) I am certain that the referee's comment is wrong and it is far from mis-interpretation. But the journal is good and famous in the field! :/ I feel disrespected as they don't even care for our time!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
The comment is just about two lines and it took the reviewer to write it down in 6 weeks! Wow! and the worse thing is that the editor has not waited to know the opinion of another reviewer!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
The comment is just about two lines and it took the reviewer to write it down in 6 weeks! Wow! and the worse thing is that the editor has not waited to know the opinion of another reviewer!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
3
3
@H.R. "it took the reviewer to write it down in 6 weeks! Wow!" Really? Consider that the reviewer is busy with their "Day job", that they had to read and follow your paper's arguments, check the references you provided and check the relevance and then you have the cheek to write "the comment is two lines and that took them 6 weeks"... You need to re-evaluate what you think...
– Solar Mike
3 hours ago
@H.R. "it took the reviewer to write it down in 6 weeks! Wow!" Really? Consider that the reviewer is busy with their "Day job", that they had to read and follow your paper's arguments, check the references you provided and check the relevance and then you have the cheek to write "the comment is two lines and that took them 6 weeks"... You need to re-evaluate what you think...
– Solar Mike
3 hours ago
@SolarMike: Dear Mike, this is not a type of comment that needs evaluation of the manuscript! The paper that the reviewer has referred to is around 1980 and as you know reviewers are experts in the field and they almost know the literature. So if you know that some problem is solved previously then it should not take 6 weeks to realize it! :) It just take you to get such a thing by taking a glance!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
@SolarMike: Dear Mike, this is not a type of comment that needs evaluation of the manuscript! The paper that the reviewer has referred to is around 1980 and as you know reviewers are experts in the field and they almost know the literature. So if you know that some problem is solved previously then it should not take 6 weeks to realize it! :) It just take you to get such a thing by taking a glance!
– H. R.
3 hours ago
2
2
I wouldn't assume that the reviewer is such an expert in your field. Also, you say "even 2 hours". The average reviewer spends about half a day on a review. If you include interuptions thats say a solid 3 hours. In that time they have to check the validity of the whole thing, and get up to speed with the area if its related to their field, but not their precise expertise. "they don't even care for our time!". Get used to this. No one cares for your time. Particularly not when you are asking them to do you a favour (eg review your manuscript).
– Ian Sudbery
51 mins ago
I wouldn't assume that the reviewer is such an expert in your field. Also, you say "even 2 hours". The average reviewer spends about half a day on a review. If you include interuptions thats say a solid 3 hours. In that time they have to check the validity of the whole thing, and get up to speed with the area if its related to their field, but not their precise expertise. "they don't even care for our time!". Get used to this. No one cares for your time. Particularly not when you are asking them to do you a favour (eg review your manuscript).
– Ian Sudbery
51 mins ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
Â
draft saved
draft discarded
Â
draft saved
draft discarded
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%2f118299%2fpaper-rejected-based-on-one-very-short-wrong-comment%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
5
Perhaps you should wait ie be patient, and give the editor more time to respond. He or she may have more urgent things to deal with at the moment and may be able to get around to your email in 5 or 10 days.
– Solar Mike
3 hours ago
@SolarMike: Thanks for the attention Mike. OK that seems reasonable. But what if I didn't get anything after 5 to 10 days?
– H. R.
3 hours ago
I'd recommend putting the word "unfairly" on a shelf. Your ms went through the same procedure as anyone else's, and came out on the wrong side of a decision. Chalk it up to experience, and use it to learn how to prevent this in future submissions.
– Scott Seidman
1 hour ago
@ScottSeidman: Thanks for the suggestion. Done. :) Yes, I got an experience which was very annoying for me! :D
– H. R.
1 hour ago