Manuscript wait time?

[BLRN]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hi there. I submitted a manuscript to a journal in early August 2020. It was updated in early November 2020 with "Under Review". I wasn't watching the status too closely but I think perhaps a new reviewer was assigned in those ~3 months and things were delayed. Anyways, no update since early Nov.

I'm curious when (if ever) it's appropriate to politely request an update from an editor.
I've had a manuscript under review for the first round for over a year and I'd like to avoid that if possible.

Thanks for your input.

 

[jdawg2017]

If it's been under review since November now is an appropriate time to reach out. I have been told that it is okay when it's gone 2-3 months once "under review." Frankly, anything longer than 6-8 weeks *once with a reviewer* seems like an absurdly long timeline. I imagine, though, that the pandemic is slowing reviewers down since some are now taking on more childcare roles and just ealing with general stress/productivity loss.

 

[Ollie123]

I'll reach out at 3 months from time of initial submission - you are extremely well within your rights to do so here. Reviewers may be slow and December basically doesn't count as a month as far as I am concerned, but taking from August to November to get it out for review in the first place is just unacceptably bad.

It can be anxiety-provoking to reach out if you are new at this, but its really not a big deal at all. Quick email to the journal contact, managing editor or action editor if you know who that is "Hey, we submitted this paper in August and just wanted to check on the status of it. Thanks for your time." Chances are good you get a "Sorry for the delay, we're waiting on 1 reviewer" or something like that. Or they just send the reviews because you are actually waiting on the editors. Odds of you upsetting anyone or it having any impact at all on their eventual decision re: the manuscript are effectively zero.

 

[Justanothergrad]

Yup, the wait time is a killer but understandable to some degree (see Ollie's post). The key I judge journals for is the time to get it out to reviews and the time for the editor to make a decision after the reviews are back. Now is the time for a quick e-mail check.

 

[beantownpsych]

Ha I would have already reached out! My general rule of thumb is 3 months.

 

[AbnormalPsych]

I just got a revise and resubmit notification after 8 months. EIGHT MONTHS.

This is a personal record wait time.

 

[Justanothergrad]

I just got a revise and resubmit notification after 8 months. EIGHT MONTHS.

This is a personal record wait time.

I had a journal take 3 months to make the editorial decision AFTER reviews were in. TWICE.

 

[AbnormalPsych]

Wow.

Keep in mind. This is an APA journal. That most of you have probably heard of.

 

[Justanothergrad]

Wow.

Keep in mind. This is an APA journal. That most of you have probably heard of.

Ditto. A very good one

 

[futureapppsy2]

If it makes anyone feel better, I submitted an MS in early November that took until January to even be assigned an editor (current status: awaiting reviewer scores).

Also, how long do you let it sit at "awaiting editor decision" before inquiring? I have one that currently at two weeks at that status and almost five months post-submission.