Popular Articles
Sorry! nothing found for
How can I check the status of my submitted paper?
Modified on Fri, 27 Oct 2023 at 04:59 PM
To check the status of your submission in our system, log into your ScholarOne Manuscripts account, and click on “Author.” Under the Author Dashboard Section, click on “Submitted Manuscripts.”
Please note that the following definitions generally apply to most journals. Each journal follows its own workflow, so some terms may not apply. Please contact the journal's editorial office for clarification.
Please see our resources on the peer review process and tips on How to Get Published .
Was this article helpful?
That’s Great!
Thank you for your feedback
Sorry! We couldn't be helpful
Let us know how can we improve this article! *
Feedback sent
We appreciate your effort and will try to fix the article
We use cookies on this site to enhance your experience
By clicking any link on this page you are giving your consent for us to set cookies.
A link to reset your password has been sent to your email.
Back to login
We need additional information from you. Please complete your profile first before placing your order.
Thank you. payment completed., you will receive an email from us to confirm your registration, please click the link in the email to activate your account., there was error during payment, orcid profile found in public registry, download history, navigating peer review: sitting and waiting – what can you do what should you do.
- Charlesworth Author Services
- 17 September, 2019
- Peer Review Process
Navigating peer review: Sitting and waiting – What can you do? What should you do?
Congratulations! You’ve submitted your article to a leading international journal (hopefully with a high impact factor ) and have checked your author area within their online submission system to see that you’re now ‘awaiting reviewer scores’. Most online systems give authors the opportunity to check on the status of submissions : it’s a good idea to log in regularly to make sure that your article is moving through the peer review process . You will see little messages like ‘awaiting editorial approval’, ‘awaiting reviewer scores’, ‘awaiting editorial board comments’ and ‘decision pending’ as your article wends its way through this process. Eventually, an editor will make a decision and you will get your paper back with comments from peer reviewers .
Should you just sit, wait and do nothing as an author as this process runs its course?
No. One of the most common kinds of questions that we are asked during our paper writing and publishing workshops is along the lines of ‘I submitted a paper to a journal three months ago and I’ve heard nothing. The system still says ‘awaiting reviewer scores’. What should I do?’. Publication speed is very important to you as an author for obvious reasons: you must write to the editor if you have no news back about peer review and a reasonable amount of time has passed.
What constitutes a ‘reasonable amount of time’?
Well, the average length of time across the publishing industry from submission to online publication is three months or 90 days. We recommend writing to your journal editor if one month has passed and your paper appears ‘stuck’ in the submission system. Publishers are also interested in speed of publication, and many will use analytics to track this by journal and sometimes even by editor – so you are not the only one in this process with a vested interest!
Writing to journal editors about your paper
Authors, especially young researchers, are often nervous about writing directly to journal editors. Don’t be: this is your paper, your research, your career, and your future. [ Get in touch with our team at Charlesworth and we can provide you with short templates for writing these kinds of emails.]
Some quick tips:
- Be polite but direct when writing to a journal editor . What’s the issue that needs to be addressed?
- Make sure your email is positive: what solution are you proposing to the issue?
For example, let’s imagine that your research paper is stuck ‘awaiting reviewer comments’ and two months have passed with no news from the journal.
‘Dear Editor: I am writing on behalf of my co-authors to enquire about the status of our paper submitted on x date, entitled y’. We see that this article is ‘awaiting reviewer comments’ and more than two months have passed: we have therefore taken the opportunity to suggest the names of some additional colleagues who would be suitable peer reviewers’.
Don’t forget to include two or three additional names and email addresses at the bottom of your short message.
It’s always a good idea to write and interact directly with journal editors. As we’ve discussed before, they are very often also busy academic researchers, running their groups, supervising students, teaching and, also, managing journals. Papers get forgotten about, reviewers are not chased. You must take the initiative as an author : editors will appreciate and understand this! Don’t be pushy. Don’t be aggressive. Always be polite, constructive and offer solutions to save the editor time .
Once, in one of our author workshops , we were asked: ‘my paper has been in review with a journal for more than a year and I’ve heard nothing. What should I do?’. It’s your career. Please don’t let this happen to you!
Read next (third) in series: Navigating peer review: How to respond to peer reviewer comments – Minor revisions
Read previous (first) in series: Navigating peer review: Making your initial submission
Charlesworth Author Services , a trusted brand supporting the world’s leading academic publishers, institutions and authors since 1928.
To know more about our services, visit: Our Services
Visit our new Researcher Education Portal that offers articles and webinars covering all aspects of your research to publication journey! And sign up for our newsletter on the Portal to stay updated on all essential researcher knowledge and information!
Register now: Researcher Education Portal
Maximise your publication success with Charlesworth Author Services.
Share with your colleagues
Related articles.
Managing peer review as an ECR: Learning to communicate effectively with editors
Charlesworth Author Services 26/03/2020 00:00:00
When peer review goes wrong: How to communicate with your target journal
Charlesworth Author Services 20/08/2019 00:00:00
Why some journals ask authors to suggest reviewers
Charlesworth Author Services 11/08/2016 00:00:00
Related webinars
Bitesize Webinar: How to write and structure your academic article for publication: Module 11: Know when your article is ready for submission
Charlesworth Author Services 05/03/2021 00:00:00
Bitesize Webinar: How to write and structure your academic article for publication - Module 12: Understand the peer review process
Charlesworth Author Services 10/03/2021 00:00:00
Bitesize Webinar: How to write and structure your academic article for publication - Module 13: Navigate the revise and resubmit process
Bitesize Webinar: How to write and structure your academic article for publication - Module 14: Increase your chances for publication
Charlesworth Author Services 20/04/2021 00:00:00
Navigating review
Navigating peer review: How to respond to peer reviewer comments – Minor revisions
Charlesworth Author Services 19/09/2019 00:00:00
Navigating peer review: How to respond to peer reviewer comments – Major revisions
Navigating peer review: How to respond to comments you disagree with in order to maximise your chances of acceptance
Charlesworth Author Services 20/09/2019 00:00:00
[email protected]
Submitted my paper. Now what?
Feb 18, 2022 | Scholarly publishing
There is something of an air of mystery as to what actually happens to your manuscript once you’ve pressed that “submit” button. It seemingly goes off into cyberspace and you are left playing the waiting game.
These days, if you’ve submitted to a journal via an online submission system, you will be able to track its progress to some extent as you will generally be able to see what stage it’s at. The names of these stages can, however, seem fairly vague and almost worse than no information at all.
So let’s translate them. There are many different submission systems and the stages a manuscript goes through during peer review does differ system to system (and, indeed, journal to journal), so for the purposes of this post we’re going to look at the most common stages of the most common submission site: ScholarOne (formally Manuscript Central).
First Steps
Initially your manuscript will go through stages such as “Awaiting Admin Checklist” and/or “Awaiting Editor Assignment” depending on how new submissions are initially checked on the journal. These stages tend to be moved through fairly swiftly as they are just the editorial team checking that your submission is suitable for peer review and then deciding which of the editors will be responsible for it during the process.
Awaiting Reviewer Selection
This is the first stage of the peer-review process and your manuscript will be here until the assigned Editor has selected some suitable experts to invite to review.
Once enough reviewers have been selected, the manuscript will move on to the next stage. If only one reviewer agrees to review and all the others decline the invitation, however, your manuscript may well return to this stage while the Editor selects more. So if you log in to check on progress several weeks after submission and find your manuscript at this stage, it doesn’t necessarily mean that no action has been taken.
Awaiting Reviewer Invitation
This means that potential reviewers have been selected, but have yet to be invited. Manuscripts quite often return to this stage if not enough of the invited reviewers accepted the invitation so further invitations need to be sent. It’s quite common for editors to select a lot of reviewers, but only invite a few at a time.
Awaiting Reviewer Assignment
This rather ambiguous stage is when reviewers have been invited, but we are waiting for the required number to agree to review. In other words, at this point, the ball is squarely in the reviewers’ court!
In an ideal world, enough of the invited reviewers will agree to review and your manuscript will move on to the next stage. In reality, however, it is quite normal for invited reviewers to be unavailable and for your manuscript to return to one of the earlier stages a couple of times.
Awaiting Reviewer Scores
This is the stage that the editorial team will be striving to get your manuscript to as swiftly as possible. If your manuscript is at this stage, then enough experts have agreed to read and evaluate it and we just need to wait for the reviewers to return their comments so that a decision can be taken.
Once through this stage, your manuscript will move on to a stage such as “Awaiting Recommendation” and/or “Awaiting Decision” and it generally won’t be long before a decision is sent to you.
So That’s It?
That’s it. There are, of course, many things that can cause delays to the process, but the majority of manuscripts move from one stage to the next fairly swiftly.
- Company information and news
- Scholarly publishing
- Testimonials
- Company Statements
- Privacy Notice
- Terms & Conditions
- Modern Slavery Statement
- Equality, Diversity & Inclusion
- Anti-Bribery Statement
Verified Reviews - IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COMMUNICATIONS
Poloz 2023-05-29
2022/10/13 submit, Awaiting AE Assignment 2022/10/17 Status: Awaiting Reviewer Selection 2022/11/4 Status: Under review 2023/2/12 Status: Major Revision 2023/3/27 Major revision submission, Status: Awaiting Reviewer Invitation 2023/3/19 Status: Under review 2023/5/26 Status: Accept The review process took a long time, a total of 225 days, but finally everything is settled before graduation!
D华丽 2023-04-17
2023/02/18 Submission 2023/05/18 Major Revision 2023/07 A revision has been submitted, under review for approximately one week after submission.
zengyue 2023-01-14
2022.03.27 Submit the paper; 2022.08.17 Return for major revisions (65 review comments, quite intense, but the initial submission indeed had these issues); 2022.09.29 Submit the revised version for major revisions; 2022.11.18 Return for major revisions (only 6 comments left from one reviewer, very responsible reviewer); 2022.12.01 Submit the revised version for major revisions; 2023.01.11 Accepted! Happy, lalala! Overall evaluation: TCOM is indeed a high-quality top journal, and the reviewers are very diligent and responsible; the raised questions are all reasonable; thanks to all the reviewers! I recommend everyone to submit their papers!
Poloz 2023-01-12
Ah, it's so difficult. It's really frustrating to wait for such a long time and get rejected. My first trial hasn't come out yet. What are you planning to do next, OP?
Kevin 2023-01-10
2023.01.10 REJECT I don't know how to start making changes...
Kevin 2023-01-04
Unfortunately, it coincided with the overseas Christmas and New Year holidays, and as of now, I have not received a decision. Let's wait patiently~
Kevin 2022-12-30
2022.12.30 Awaiting Editor Decision. The quality of the new year depends on the editor's decision.
风封峰 2022-12-23
Submitted on 3.10, rejected on 6.27. Re-submitted after revision on 7.23, major revision on 10.13. Submitted on 11.24, accepted on 12.22. Took more than 9 months.
Kevin 2022-12-19
The review process of a journal is indeed very agonizing~ It has been so long, and there is still no sign of progress. I can only patiently wait.
Poloz 2022-11-26
Based on experience, the first review should take about two months. If lucky, the reviewers respond quickly and the editors handle it promptly, and the first review result can be obtained in less than two months. If luck is not so good, the reviewers may wait until the deadline to give their comments, and the editors may also wait until the deadline to reply, so it is possible for it to take three months ?.
WWTkh 2022-11-22
May I ask how long the second "under review" will last, and is it necessary to find a new reviewer?
Kevin 2022-11-21
Finding a reviewer takes a really long time, huh~ hh How long does the formal review process take?
Aptom 2022-11-20
2022.4.18 submitted 2022.8.8 major revision 2022.9.29 resubmitted 2022.11.14 accepted Translated into English: 2022.4.18 submitted 2022.8.8 major revision 2022.9.29 resubmitted 2022.11.14 accepted
Poloz 2022-11-18
It is very likely that the reviewer has not been available. It has been almost two months, and the editor had to urge them before the reviewer finally responded. ?
Kevin 2022-11-11
2022.11.11 Under Review, it's unbelievable that it has just entered the review stage now~ So incredible, haha.
Kevin 2022-11-08
Why is it that my submission has been two months and still "Awaiting Reviewer Assignment"... Does it mean that they haven't found any reviewers yet?
Poloz 2022-10-17
2022/10/17 Status: Awaiting Reviewer Selection 2022/11/4 Status: Under review
2022/10/17 Awaiting Reviewer Selection
Kevin 2022-10-13
It has been a month since submission, and it has been "Awaiting Reviewer Assignment" all along. Does it mean the manuscript is already under review? Hopefully, good luck! Keep updating!
Poloz 2022-10-13
The following text translated into English is: "Veteran communication journal. 2022/10/13 submit, Awaiting AE Assignment 2022/10/17 Status: Awaiting Reviewer Selection 2022/11/4 Status: Under review 2023/2/12 Status: Major Revision 2023/3/27 Major revision submission, Status: Awaiting Reviewer Invitation 2023/3/19 Status: Under review 2023/5/26 Status: Accept!"
Kevin 2022-09-29
As of now, it has not entered the review stage yet~
jxgsd 2022-08-22
You can give it a try. After all, the first time is due to direction reasons.
JCCJ 2022-08-19
August 18th, awaiting editor decision.
jxgsd 2022-07-25
In other words, it means that only rejection is possible, but you can submit again. If the paper is rejected by the current journal, you need to upload the revised manuscript and a response letter. This is explained in the "Information for authors" section.
The journals TCOM and TWC do not have the option of resubmission after rejection. They only reject submissions directly. However, these two journals allow for a particular situation: if your manuscript has been rejected only once (including both this journal and other journals), then you can submit again. In other words, if you have not submitted to any other journal and your submission to TCOM has been rejected, TCOM allows you to revise the manuscript and submit it along with a response letter.
宇宙系浪漫 2022-07-22
Hello~ May I ask if it is a rejection with the option to resubmit, or just a rejection without the possibility of resubmission?
jxgsd 2022-07-21
I submitted another article at the beginning of March and encountered the same editor as last time. The processing speed was very fast. The first review result came out in 55 days and it was rejected. After making revisions for one month, I resubmitted it and it was accepted after 50 days. It took more than 5 months in total.
JCCJ 2022-07-02
July 2nd Under Review
DMDLI 2022-06-22
Submitted in November last year, received the first review notice in February this year. Revised in April, received minor revisions in June, and then received the acceptance notification shortly after submission. It took approximately 8 months from submission to acceptance.
JCCJ 2022-06-16
Submitted on March 31st. Currently still awaiting reviewer assignment. Hoping for good luck.
Publish scientific posters with Peeref
Peeref publishes scientific posters from all research disciplines. Our Diamond Open Access policy means free access to content and no publication fees for authors.
Find the ideal target journal for your manuscript
Explore over 38,000 international journals covering a vast array of academic fields.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
I have revised the manuscript two times: the first major revision and the second minor revision. After submitting the minor revision, the status changed to under review and pending approval. After ...
1 Answer to this question. Answer: It is quite normal for a revised paper to be reviewed once again. In case of major revisions, revised manuscripts are almost always sent for a second round of peer review. For minor revisions, some editors might make a decision on their own, but they can send it out for peer review if they feel the need to.
Here is a possible interpretation: the paper might have received the comments of all of its reviewers. So, its status is "Awaiting Decision". But the editor, for some reason, e.g., conflicting opinions in those comments, has sent the paper to another reviewer. Thus, the status also reflects "Awaiting Reviewer Scores".
1. It typically means that the paper has been received, has been put in the work queue of the editor, but the editor has not assigned reviewers. Or (in one system I know of), that the editor has not assigned the necessary number of reviewers. That could be because the system requires four reviewers, but the editor has only gotten the commitment ...
After two rounds of revision, the status of my manuscript has changing from "Awaiting Reviewer Invitation" to "Awaiting Reviewer Assignment" within a span of three months. This change has occurred ...
After two rounds of revision, the status of my manuscript has changing from "Awaiting Reviewer Invitation" to "Awaiting Reviewer Assignment" within a span of three months. This change has occurred ...
It should take at least a few weeks for re-review and the editor to make a decision after your revision is submitted (if the previous decision was B (minor revisions), then the timelines may be shorter). Note that the time it takes for an editor to make a decision on your revision may vary depending on the editor's workload and the time of year.
I submitted my manuscript to a journal. After a short time, the status of the manuscript changed to 'Reviewer selection,' then 'Reviewer assignment', then 'Reviewer selection', and then 'Reviewer assignment' again. The status has not changed to 'Under review'. I am afraid that after this long period, the editor will reject the manuscript. So, please give me advice. Should I ...
Awaiting Admin Processing: Your submission is waiting for initial review by the editorial office. This may involve checking that the submission is within the journal's scope and adheres to submission guidelines. Awaiting Editor Assignment: Multiple editors may be assigned to your submission, depending on the journal's workflow.
The paper was accepted with minor revision (two reviewers both recommended 'minor revision'). I revised the paper accordingly and addressed the feedbacks. After submitting the revised article for a week, a ADM was assigned and the status has changed to "awaiting reviewer invitation."
After two rounds of revision, the status of my manuscript has changing from "Awaiting Reviewer Invitation" to "Awaiting Reviewer Assignment" within a span of three months. This change has occurred ...
After undergoing a major revision, the paper was successfully accepted. The second review took two weeks, which was very fast. ... The status "Awaiting Reviewer Assignment" lasts for approximately 10 days, and then it transitions to "Awaiting Reviewer Scores," indicating that it is likely undergoing external review.
I resubmitted a major revision approximately a month ago to a social science journal. I am curious as to why the status of the manuscript regularly changes between 'awaiting reviewer selection' and 'awaiting reviewer assignment'. This has happened several times. Any thoughts?
Most online systems give authors the opportunity to check on the status of submissions: it's a good idea to log in regularly to make sure that your article is moving through the peer review process. You will see little messages like 'awaiting editorial approval', 'awaiting reviewer scores', 'awaiting editorial board comments' and ...
After losing contact with you completely and advertising your paper as "awaiting reviewer invitation" after six months, in my view the editors should be apologizing and telling you what they're going to do to fix the situation. If you get the sense that they don't see it that way, it's definitely time to try again with a different journal.
First Steps. Initially your manuscript will go through stages such as "Awaiting Admin Checklist" and/or "Awaiting Editor Assignment" depending on how new submissions are initially checked on the journal. These stages tend to be moved through fairly swiftly as they are just the editorial team checking that your submission is suitable for ...
Verified Reviews - IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COMMUNICATIONS. Note: Verified reviews are sourced from across review platforms and social media globally. Poloz 2023-05-29. 2022/10/13 submit, Awaiting AE Assignment 2022/10/17 Status: Awaiting Reviewer Selection 2022/11/4 Status: Under review 2023/2/12 Status: Major Revision 2023/3/27 Major revision ...
After two rounds of revision, the status of my manuscript has changing from "Awaiting Reviewer Invitation" to "Awaiting Reviewer Assignment" within a span of three months. This change has occurred ...
The manuscript being stuck at Awaiting Reviewer Assignment for a month is not uncommon. This means that while the manuscript cleared the desk screening and was deemed good to go for peer review, the journal is finding it somewhat challenging to identify the right peer reviewers for your paper. This could be because potential peer reviewers ...
The status "Awaiting reviewer assignment" means that your paper has cleared teh initial editorial screening and will be sent for peer review. During this time, the editor looks for suitable reviewers for your paper and sends out review invitations. The reason this status took three weeks is probably because finding suitable reviewers can be a ...
I just submitted a revised paper to ScholarOne (major revision). After one day of submission, status was 'Awaiting Decision'; but now after 10 days, status change into 'Awaiting reviewer selection'. I suppose that in most cases of minor revision, the revised manuscript will only be reviewed by the ADM or associate editor. However, I just noticed that the status of my revised manuscript ...
2. Whether or not a paper has to go through another round of reviews is up to the discretion of the editor. "Minor revision" and "major revision" are gradual, not categorical distinctions and have no guaranteed bearing on how the next round of revision must be treated. Share. Improve this answer. answered Jun 9, 2021 at 16:37. Wolfgang Bangerth.
For most manuscripts, in the first round of review, usually two peer reviewers are selected. For further insights, you may go through this related query by another researcher: Why does my manuscript's status keep changing from "awaiting reviewer selection" to "awaiting reviewer assignment"? So, great.