Delays in journal decisions are common, especially in SCI and Scopus indexed journals, because of reviewer availability, multiple revision rounds, and editorial workload. However, authors are not powerless, and there are ethical ways to respond and reduce waiting time.
If a journal has not provided any decision for several months, the first step is to check the journal’s stated review timeline on its website. Many journals mention an average review period, which typically ranges from two to six months. If the manuscript has exceeded this period significantly, it is reasonable to contact the journal.
A polite follow-up email should be sent to the editorial office or handling editor. The message should be professional, brief, and non-confrontational, requesting a status update on the manuscript. Editors generally respond positively to respectful inquiries and may expedite the process if the delay is unintentional.
If there is no response after a reasonable follow-up and the delay extends beyond six months with no reviewer reports, authors may consider formally withdrawing the manuscript. Withdrawal must be confirmed in writing before submitting the paper to another journal. Withdrawing without confirmation and submitting elsewhere is unethical and risky.
If reviewer comments are received but the decision is delayed due to editorial processing, authors should remain patient but may send a second polite inquiry after several weeks. Repeated or aggressive emails should be avoided, as they may negatively affect the editor’s perception of the author.
To speed up publication ethically, journal selection plays a crucial role. Choosing journals that clearly state review timelines, have regular publication schedules, and are known for efficient editorial processes significantly reduces waiting time. Some SCI and Scopus journals are known for faster decisions, especially applied or interdisciplinary journals.
Preparing the manuscript carefully before submission is another key strategy. Papers that strictly follow the journal’s scope, formatting, and submission guidelines are less likely to face administrative delays or desk rejections. Clear writing, strong methodology, and proper citations also reduce the number of revision cycles.
Responding quickly and thoroughly to reviewer comments helps shorten the overall publication timeline. Revised manuscripts should include a clear response-to-reviewers document explaining how each comment was addressed. Delayed or incomplete revisions often prolong the review process.
Submitting to special issues can also reduce review time, as these issues usually operate under fixed deadlines and involve guest editors who actively manage the review process. However, authors must ensure the special issue is legitimate and aligned with the journal’s scope.
Another ethical approach is to use preprint servers if the journal allows it. Preprints make the research publicly visible while the paper is under review, without violating ethical guidelines. This does not speed up journal decisions but reduces the pressure of delayed visibility.
It is important to avoid unethical shortcuts such as submitting to multiple journals simultaneously, manipulating reviewer suggestions, or choosing predatory journals that promise unrealistically fast acceptance. These practices can cause long-term harm to an author’s academic record.
In conclusion, when a journal delays a decision for months, authors should respond with patience, professionalism, and ethical judgment. Careful journal selection, high-quality manuscript preparation, timely revisions, and transparent communication are the safest and most effective strategies for speeding up publication without ethical risk.