Read the decision precisely
Distinguish a desk rejection, a rejection after review and an invitation to submit a substantially new version. Identify whether concerns relate to scope, novelty, design, evidence, clarity or journal priorities. An editorial decision should not be interpreted solely from its most encouraging sentence.
Create a response and revision matrix
List each criticism, the evidence needed, your proposed action and the location of any manuscript change. Separate tasks you can complete now from limitations that cannot be removed. If further data or analyses are required, agree those as distinct work.
Decide whether an appeal is justified
Read the journal’s appeal policy. An appeal should identify a specific factual misunderstanding or procedural concern with supporting evidence; disappointment alone is not a strong basis. The author decides whether to appeal, revise or move on.
Retarget without carrying old errors forward
Reassess the audience and article category, revise the manuscript and rebuild the submission package for the next journal. Remove obsolete journal names, formatting and declarations. Keep the submission history and avoid simultaneous submission.
Scope, files and delivery
Start with a short project brief. We assess the work, discuss the expertise required and confirm the deliverables, fee, schedule and included revisions in writing. Share the current version and the instructions that govern it. Additional data, a new target journal or a substantially changed brief may require a revised scope. You review the proposed changes and retain responsibility for the research.