Nonresponse Policy

Purpose: This policy allows the editors to reject a manuscript due to a lack of communication and/or satisfactory progress by an author regarding an NSURJ submission.

Introduction: In the past, several authors failed to communicate with editors and make satisfactory progress on research submissions that ultimately led to increased work and wasted time of the NSURJ editors. In order to minimize wasted time and resources on a single submission, NSURJ retains the right to drop a manuscript and author from the editing process if they fail to communicate and/or make satisfactory progress on a manuscript.

Manuscripts are rarely ready to publish when received and usually undergo extensive revisions prior to referee review. Once a manuscript is reviewed by the referee, it often undergoes further revisions. This process of review, which ideally culminates in a publication, highly benefits the author by vastly improving the quality of the manuscript. In addition, the author will reap any and all benefits that arise from a publication.

Goals: The editors hope that by implementing this policy:

  1. Authors will be incentivized to complete edits in a timely manner and remain responsive throughout the editing process.
  2. The time spent preparing for publication will be shortened. Allowing for punctual publication of the issue. Thus, deadlines and publishing dates will not need to be extended.

Implementation: When an author has exhausted the allocated time frames acceptable for responsiveness and satisfactory progression, the manuscript will be dropped from the editing process. To do this, the manuscript will be rejected on the grounds of the author’s unresponsiveness. A rejection notification will be sent to the author outlining the reasons for removal. Activity logs are kept by associate editors to record the progress of each manuscript. When the activity log reflects that an author has been unresponsive and/or has not made satisfactory progress after fifteen (15) days, the author will receive a warning of unresponsiveness via email which will detail this policy and the risk of removal from the journal. A response to the warning email does not constitute responsiveness on the part of the author and the author will still be considered unresponsive. The author will be considered in good standing if the required action is completed (ex: round of edits) or an issue is addressed (ex: technical issues) within the following fifteen (15) days. These two consecutive fifteen (15) day periods constitute the thirty (30) day time requirements for an author to avoid removal from the publication.

The author will also be dropped if unresponsive for three non-consecutive fifteen (15) day periods during the editing process, totaling forty-five (45) days. The author will receive warning emails for the first two non-consecutive unresponsive periods and may be removed at the end of the third nonconsecutive unresponsive period without further notice. Authors who have been removed will be able to resubmit the manuscript for later issues, however, they will only receive one unresponsive email warning during the entire editing process and will be dropped after thirty (30) days of unresponsiveness.

Exceptions: All exceptions will be made at the sole discretion of the editors. The following list includes
possible exception circumstances, but is not meant to be an exhaustive list.

  1. Authors with legitimate reasons to be unresponsive and/or fail to make satisfactory progress. Legitimate reasons may include, but are not limited to, medical reasons, extended periods abroad, or family emergencies.
  2. If an author informs the editors of a planned unresponsive period in a timely manner prior to the end of the period. This could include, but is not limited to, vacation time.
  3. An extension may be granted if an author reports issues and proof of attempts to rectify issues in a timely manner.