I have an extensive experience in scholarly publishing as author and reviewer.

Most of my manuscripts have been rejected several times before eventually getting accepted and published.

I now favor not changing substantially my manuscripts after a rejection, even if accompanied by peer reviewers comments, as I feel that in most cases this has to do with a priority judgement rather than on the work strengths and weaknesses.

I this acceptable and efficient, or actually unethical and disrespectful of the peer review process?

Leave a reply

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong> 

required