I have two journal articles that were rejected last year by one journal. I am wondering now that I have some extra time whether I should extensively revise them in accordance with the peer review reports or only do minor editing before sending them out to other journals for consideration. My feeling is that in each case the first peer review report was merely a hostile or dismissive attempt to prevent publication. However, the second peer report in each case does appear to actually contain some constructive criticism. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
If there's someone at this particular journal who is hostile-ly trying to keep you from getting published, then perhaps it would be best to take the constructive criticism you got, revise your articles, and send them to another journal.
ReplyDelete