"Decision Awaited" on a Revised Manuscript

[shernjerner]

I recently resubmitted a revised manuscript to a journal. The status showed "awaiting reviewer assignment" for a week, and today, which is the eighth day, it changed to "awaiting decision." There were no intermediate updates, such as "reviewers assigned" or "under review."

I'm wondering if such a jump within a week is normal. Can anybody guide me based on their experience as an author or possibly an editor/reviewer on what this could mean, and by when one can usually expect to hear from the Editor-in-Chief after this status is displayed? Does this mean the reviewers have finished reviewing the revised manuscript and have submitted their scores, or that they have returned the manuscript without reviewing? I'm sorry for so many questions, and I know one can't know for sure, but I'd appreciate any perspectives or insights you can share.

To add: I received this automated message moments after submitting the revised manuscript: "Your revised manuscript has been sent out for review for consideration for publication. The time in the peer review process is typically one to two months."

The timeline mentioned in this message seems to conflict with the status updates on my author portal, which makes me all the more curious.

If there was no intermediate status (such as “under review”) then it sounds like the editor / AE has decided that it doesn’t need to go back out to peer review. Were the comments/edits quite minor?

I would think the same, but since I was given significantly major revisions, I’m now wondering how the reviewers could have assessed those changes in just a week.

What I meant is that it sounds like the AE has decided to make a decision without sending it to the reviewers.

Or there is now a reviewer who is reading and reviewing it. I’m not sure what your issue is.

As an editor I can just say that it now takes a lot longer to find willing and efficient and constructive reviewers. It’s the kind of unpaid labour we used to have time for but increasingly do not feel we can do (and goodness knows when editors do their work - mine is done on Sundays). So there may have been quite a delay finding the right reviewer who agreed to do it.

That's possible, but in case of major revisions, isn't it a general practice to send the revised manuscript back to the original reviewers?

Yes, but it sounds like they decided to skip that step for some reason. As an editor I’ve mostly done that if the comments/revisions were minor. But I’ve also occasionally done it if e.g. none of the original reviewers were available to re-review.

I hope that’s the case with my paper and I hear from them soon.

I had one like this. I redid the analysis completely by another method - but it was the editor who then approved it without it going back to the reviewers.

It certainly is getting extremely difficult to get competent reviewers. Completely understandable - but getting so bad it just isn't sustainable. Reviews were always a bit hit and miss - but now - 😫It has really put me off being involved as a journal editor going forward.

I completely understand where you’re coming from. It’s discouraging, especially when so much of the burden falls back on editors to make final calls without the reassurance of a thorough peer review. In my case, I appreciate that the editor may have been facing similar difficulties; however, I sincerely hope that they were able to involve the original reviewers-or at least the most suitable reviewers- for my manuscript. The original reviewers had given some really encouraging feedback on my paper, and so I'm hoping that they agree to review my revised submission. Saying that, I know it's beyond anyone's control, and things may turn out differently.