No comment desk rejections are the worst rejections. We're really good at creating Gods...
No comment desk rejections
-
I see your point but still it’s very cruel. Assuming the editor had a quick look at the paper, why is it so difficult him/her to write a short note to say what she/he thought about the paper.
Do you prefer to wait 5 month for random comments referee rejection?
you mean like the paper is too specific?
-
Yeah, OP, better to get a comment from editor, but they are generally very brief and really do not tell you much beyond that they are not interested in further considering your paper either because it is wrong field or not all that interesting or something like that. This is not something to get too worked up about, and indeed, a lot better than waiting a year and a half for a rejection after three rounds of revision, which most certainly happens, even if it should not.
A Longtime Editor
-
Yeah, OP, better to get a comment from editor, but they are generally very brief and really do not tell you much beyond that they are not interested in further considering your paper either because it is wrong field or not all that interesting or something like that. This is not something to get too worked up about, and indeed, a lot better than waiting a year and a half for a rejection after three rounds of revision, which most certainly happens, even if it should not.
A Longtime EditorHow long you would normally spend on a paper that you desk reject (and how long on one that you would send to refs at first)?
-
5b61,
I spend a lot more than five minutes on manuscripts before I decide what to do with them, even the worst ones. There is no set time. What are you trying to prove with dumm question?
Oh, and I desk reject over half the manuscripts that cross my desk. Those getting it should be grateful. My observation is that the only people who complain are either very junior, probably first time, submitters, and big cheese egomaniacs, several of whom I have desk rejected.
-
5b61,
I spend a lot more than five minutes on manuscripts before I decide what to do with them, even the worst ones. There is no set time. What are you trying to prove with dumm question?
Oh, and I desk reject over half the manuscripts that cross my desk. Those getting it should be grateful. My observation is that the only people who complain are either very junior, probably first time, submitters, and big cheese egomaniacs, several of whom I have desk rejected.Mate, wasn’t trying to prove anything. Wasn’t meant to be a rhetorical question or anything of the sort. I was simply interested in knowing how long an editor spends on a paper at first time. I can imagine it varies, but I thought there would be a mode around some time. Anyway, if it was a silly question. Just forget it.
-
Yeah, OP, better to get a comment from editor, but they are generally very brief and really do not tell you much beyond that they are not interested in further considering your paper either because it is wrong field or not all that interesting or something like that. This is not something to get too worked up about, and indeed, a lot better than waiting a year and a half for a rejection after three rounds of revision, which most certainly happens, even if it should not.
A Longtime EditorI recently received a desk rejection from Econometrica from a very famous economist. I personally would prefer there was no comment. What was written strongly indicates that the editor a) spent less than a minute on the paper and b) has no idea about the field. The paper was eventually published in a decent journal.
-
Yeah, OP, better to get a comment from editor, but they are generally very brief and really do not tell you much beyond that they are not interested in further considering your paper either because it is wrong field or not all that interesting or something like that. This is not something to get too worked up about, and indeed, a lot better than waiting a year and a half for a rejection after three rounds of revision, which most certainly happens, even if it should not.
A Longtime EditorI recently received a desk rejection from Econometrica from a very famous economist. I personally would prefer there was no comment. What was written strongly indicates that the editor a) spent less than a minute on the paper and b) has no idea about the field. The paper was eventually published in a decent journal.
maybe your manuscript wasn't clear.
-
Yeah, OP, better to get a comment from editor, but they are generally very brief and really do not tell you much beyond that they are not interested in further considering your paper either because it is wrong field or not all that interesting or something like that. This is not something to get too worked up about, and indeed, a lot better than waiting a year and a half for a rejection after three rounds of revision, which most certainly happens, even if it should not.
A Longtime EditorHow long you would normally spend on a paper that you desk reject (and how long on one that you would send to refs at first)?
It depends on whether the editor/AE knows your name. I have seen crappy articles sent out for review.
-
Yeah, OP, better to get a comment from editor, but they are generally very brief and really do not tell you much beyond that they are not interested in further considering your paper either because it is wrong field or not all that interesting or something like that. This is not something to get too worked up about, and indeed, a lot better than waiting a year and a half for a rejection after three rounds of revision, which most certainly happens, even if it should not.
A Longtime EditorI recently received a desk rejection from Econometrica from a very famous economist. I personally would prefer there was no comment. What was written strongly indicates that the editor a) spent less than a minute on the paper and b) has no idea about the field. The paper was eventually published in a decent journal.
Referee resources are scarce. The fact that the paper was published at a "decent journal" strongly suggests it was not good enough for Econometrica and the editor made the right call.
I have been desk-rejected by Econometrica before. Happens to everyone, and no need to take it personally. Just be realistic about the quality of your work.