What is going on?

December 12, 2016

(This article was originally published at Hyndsight, and syndicated at StatsBlogs.)

I seem to be getting an increasing number of submissions where the author has clearly not bothered to actually check that the paper was submitted correctly. Here is a rejection letter I wrote today.

Dear xxxxx

I am writing concerning manuscript #INTFOR_16xxxxx entitled “xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx” which you submitted to the International Journal of Forecasting.

Thank you for this submission, but as it consists entirely of the IJF author guidelines, it is not suitable for publication in the IJF. We publish original research, not author guidelines. Perhaps the Journal for Guidelines would be an appropriate outlet.

In future, when you are asked to check the pdf of your paper, you might find it useful to actually do so, rather than just claim to have done so. That way, you might avoid this kind of mistake.

In the light of the comments above, I have chosen not to publish your manuscript in the International Journal of Forecasting. I know this will be disappointing to you, but we receive a large number of submissions and can only publish a small percentage of them.

Thank you for considering the International Journal of Forecasting for the publication of your research. I hope the outcome of this specific submission will not discourage you from the submission of future manuscripts.

Prof. Rob J Hyndman
Editor-in-Chief, International Journal of Forecasting

Please comment on the article here: Hyndsight

Tags: , ,