One of the most important stages of peer review is the recommendation to the journal editor. Reviewers often struggle to decide between recommending major revisions and rejection.
Both recommendations indicate that a manuscript is not ready for publication in its current form. But they signal very different things about a paper’s prospects and about what authors should do next.
Common recommendations made by peer reviewers
- Accept means the manuscript is ready to publish as is or with only copyediting.
- Minor revisions means the paper is fundamentally sound and issues can be addressed without another round of peer review.
- Major revisions means the paper has publication potential but requires substantial work, additional analyses, restructuring, or improved reporting.
- Reject means the paper is not ready or suitable for the journal because the problems are fundamental, the scope is wrong, or the contribution is insufficient.
Deciding between recommending major revisions and rejection
The key question is whether the manuscript could be ready for consideration once the issues you identified have been addressed, or whether those issues represent fundamental flaws that cannot be resolved through revision.
Fixable issues include insufficient method details, inadequate statistical reporting, unclear structure, overstated conclusions, missing supplementary material, or gaps in the literature review. Fundamental problems include inappropriate study design, unreliable data, irreconcilable inconsistencies, or conclusions unsupported by the data.
When major revisions is the right call
- The paper addresses an important and appropriate research question.
- The core methodology is sound even if it needs better documentation.
- The results are credible.
- The conclusions are broadly appropriate.
- The problems can be addressed without redesigning the study.
When recommending major revisions, be specific. A request for a power calculation and sensitivity analysis is more useful than a general request for more rigorous analysis.
When rejection is the right call
- The study design cannot support the conclusions.
- The data are unreliable.
- The research question has already been answered convincingly and the study adds nothing new.
- The manuscript is outside the journal’s scope.
- The ethical integrity of the research is compromised.
If you recommend rejection, explain clearly why. A rejection recommendation that identifies the fundamental problem can still make a genuine contribution.
Avoiding common mistakes
- Do not recommend major revisions when the paper should be rejected because you are anxious about delivering bad news.
- Do not recommend rejection based on personal taste, preferred methodology, or expectations from a different journal standard.
Framing your recommendation
Whether you recommend major revisions or rejection, your recommendation should be consistent with the substance of your report. Read your report before submitting and make sure the recommendation follows logically from the concerns you raised.
