Are you working on a manuscript, a grant application or your thesis?

I'm almost on the verge of submitting my paper to Cureus. What things should be kept in mind before submission

What are the common mistakes that lead to delayed acceptance or rejection?

I'm leaving academia but I'm required to publish 2 papers by my supervisors.

I personally don't care about the publishing because I'm leaving academia. However, I'm stuck with my supervisors until both my papers are accepted. They want 2 papers and want it to be in Q1 journals only, which has made the entire situation really annoying. I tried saying no, but they won't take no for an answer. I also need them for my recommendation letters and don't want to burn bridges after having had zero conflict during the entire PhD

What are some ways in which I can speed up the process and also increase my chances of getting accepted? Some of my colleagues have suggested:

1. To target special editions within Q1 journals

2. To cite previous papers from the journal to show how the work directly links to their papers.

I'm based in the UK, social sciences and target journal is: European Journal of Engineering Education.

I'd like to hear hacks on how to make it past desk rejections as well, since this will be my first time writing and sending a paper. I'm yet to start writing the papers, so any advice at all is welcome I have no idea how this system works.

I submitted a second-round resubmission to a Taylor & Francis journal on October 5, and I'm seeing two different statuses:

- Author dashboard: "Under Review"

- Submission portal: "With Journal Administrator"

It's been about three days. My understanding is that the dashboard label is a generic umbrella status and that "With Journal Administrator" is the real workflow state, meaning the editorial office is doing its post-resubmission file check before routing it back to the editor.

I'm not sure I'm reading that right.

Questions:

1. Is this the normal sequence for T&F journals on ScholarOne?
2. How long did your resubmissions typically sit with the administrator before moving to "With Editor"? The first revision I submitted it stayed with Journal administrator for 1 day and then moved to the editor. But this time its been more than 2 days. What should I do? Should I email the Journal Administrator?

Thanks in advance.

On Monday I heard back from the editor of my no. 1 targeted journal. They accepted my article after two rounds of major revisions and one of minor revisions with acceptance recommended.

I’ve published before, but this is the most prestigious journal I’ve ever submitted to and I was not expecting to manage it. I had a list of backup journals I thought I’d need to submit to after a rejection.

I’m not currently employed in academia, as I quit an extremely unfulfilling role three years ago (not teaching and not entirely research-based either; museum curatorship at a public university).

But now after getting my PhD last year and now single-author publishing my doctoral research in the most prestigious journal in my field with a 13% acceptance rate, without a mentor, I’m considering maybe it’s worth giving it another try.

That’s it, I just wanted to share my good news with whoever is going to read this. I still have massive impostor syndrome and I wonder if it will ever subside (I’m 33F), but I am pleased to see my efforts have led to something good.

Hi there. I applied for the winter issue of 2026 and I think notifications come in mid-October. I was wondering if anyone had heard if they got published yet or for the people that have been published in a previous issue when were you notified? I also think they do an interview for selected authors

Curious to hear everyone’s thoughts. The fanciest journal I go for is 4.7 IF and that’s because it’s the journal for my field. I’m curious if anyone else doesn’t care about publishing in the bougiest journals.

My friend and I have been developing a platform that puts the power of publishing into your hands. We still haven't worked out all the kinks, but we are almost ready to fully launch. The website is up and the discord exists if you all would like to hang out! https://discord.gg/7mYRRtFQZ

There's some debate out there over how much of a serious crisis the "reproducibility crisis" really is. On the one hand, self-reproduction rates can be shockingly low, which points to poor coding/data practices. But on the other hand, low replication rates aren't inherently a bad thing.

Still, some surveys show that something like 60+% of scientists believe that publication pressure is the largest or second largest threat to research integrity. It totally makes sense that this pressure could sway authors to cut corners, commit misconduct, or unintentionally be remiss when editing, etcetera--leading to unreproducible/unreplicable research.

Have you had any experiences with publication pressure leading to problems with reproduction or replication?

Hi Researchers,For a Q1 journal publication, how do you verify the novelty of your research idea?
I tested my idea using Claude and ChatGPT but almost every time, they say that similar prior work already exists including papers on arXiv.
So how can we properly verify whether an idea is genuinely novel? Also, what exactly is considered sufficient novelty for a Q1 publication?
Please share your thoughts and experiences. Let’s have a discussion and exchange ideas on how researchers evaluate novelty before starting or submitting their work.

I accidentally approved the final proofs of our article and it was sent to production. None of the other authors got a chance to review them and my PI is pissed off. I emailed the journal right away! Is there still hope? 😭

Today was supposed to be a normal manuscript day.

Instead:

I finally sat down to work on my paper for the IETE Journal of Research… only to discover the journal wasn’t showing up on the Taylor & Francis submission portal. 💀

Then, after spending basically the entire night preparing another manuscript… Elsevier got hacked.☠️

At this point, I’m genuinely questioning whether the universe is trying to tell me something.

I just wanted to publish a paper.

PhD life: 10% research, 90% wondering what breaks next.

Please tell me I’m not the only one having a day like this. 😭

Hello all,

I'm about to submit a paper to the Dermatology Practical and Conceptual. I was wondering what the experience has been with turn around times. How quickly do they review? I'm submitting today and wondering if I could get an acceptance by November.

My work is a retrospective analysis. It's also needs to be accepted by a Pubmed cited peer reviewed journal by Nov 2026.

Should I pick another journal?

Thanks,

I am working in cancer biology, and everytime I think about writing the papers, some new results come up and I get absorbed in making sense of that new result. I am finding it very difficult to actually wrap it up and write the paper. I feel uncomfortable with having any loose ends. But it just keep getting messier mechanism wise.

I am looking for general tips on how to increase efficiency in terms of converting headwork to measurable output in terms of publications. What do the top labs do? What's the mindset like of top PIs to actually decide what mechanism/line to persue and where to draw a line.

Any advice or any PI story or any guideline would do me a lot good.

Thanks.