I received a decidedly uninformative rejection letter yester-day from the first journal to which I submitted my paper. Said rejection was a form letter explaining that a member of the editorial board, rather than a referee, read the paper, and that, when in such cases they decided to reject a paper, they save time by not producing a report. In most cases we are not rejecting papers because they have a particular flaw. (Although, presumably, in other cases they are, and they haven't even told me into which of these two categories my paper falls.)

Anyway, I need to decide to which journal I will next submit, look at their submission guidelines, reformat it and see how much more or less I can fit into it, and then send it off again.

Tags: papers, writing

This entry was posted and is filed under communication, economics, personal, public. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.