What Does Decision in Process Mean in Elsevier?
What does decision in process mean Elsevier? In Elsevier Editorial Manager, the status means that an editor has begun entering an editorial decision for your manuscript. It is a workflow signal, not a coded prediction of the outcome. Your paper may ultimately receive a revision request, acceptance, rejection, or transfer recommendation, and in some cases the editor may seek another review or additional editorial input before finalizing the decision.
For authors, this stage can feel unusually stressful because the manuscript has often already moved through several visible statuses—such as With Editor, Under Review, or Required Reviews Complete—and the phrase “Decision in Process” sounds final without actually telling you what the decision is. First-time researchers may read forum anecdotes and assume that a fast decision means rejection or that a long decision means acceptance. Those patterns are unreliable. Journals differ in editorial structure, reviewer availability, internal approval requirements, and the way Editorial Manager labels each stage.
The most useful response is therefore practical rather than speculative. Confirm that no action request has arrived by email, keep your submission files organized, and wait for the formal editorial decision letter. If a revision is requested, that letter—not the dashboard label—will explain the editor’s decision, reviewer comments, deadlines, and next steps. If the status remains unchanged far beyond the journal’s normal decision timeline, a short and respectful enquiry to the editorial office is appropriate.
This guide explains what the status means, why it can appear after peer review, why it can sometimes move backward, what usually happens next, how long authors may need to wait, and how to prepare for revision without overinterpreting the status. Where manuscript clarity or reviewer-response preparation becomes difficult, ethical research paper editing support can help improve communication while leaving the research decisions, data, claims, and final submission responsibility with the author.
Quick Answer: What Does Decision in Process Mean Elsevier?
Decision in Process means the editors have begun entering a decision in Elsevier Editorial Manager. Elsevier’s current submission-status guidance explains that a decision may need confirmation by more than one editor in some journals. The editor can also decide that another review or another editor is needed, which may return the manuscript to an earlier status.
The status therefore does not mean “accepted,” “rejected,” or even “final decision completed.” It means that the editorial team is actively processing the next decision. When the decision is finalized, the journal sends the corresponding author a direct email with the overall editorial outcome, comments, and further instructions.
The best action is usually to wait for that message rather than trying to infer the outcome from timing or status changes. If the manuscript remains in Decision in Process much longer than the journal’s normal decision window, a polite status enquiry can be reasonable.
Key Takeaways
- Decision in Process is an editorial workflow status, not an outcome.
- It can precede acceptance, revision, rejection, transfer, or a return to review.
- Elsevier notes that some journals may require confirmation by multiple editors before a decision is finalized.
- A move back to Under Review can occur if the editor wants another opinion or additional review.
- There is no universal Elsevier-wide number of days for this status; journal workflows vary.
- The formal decision email and editor/reviewer comments are the authoritative source for what you need to do next.
- Professional editing is most useful after a revision request when clarity, structure, formatting, or a reviewer-response document needs careful improvement.
What This Page Covers
- The exact practical meaning of Decision in Process in Elsevier Editorial Manager
- How it differs from Under Review and Required Reviews Complete
- Why the status does not predict acceptance or rejection
- Why a manuscript can return to an earlier status after a decision begins
- What can happen after the editor finalizes a decision
- When an author should wait and when a status enquiry may be appropriate
- How to prepare for revision, reviewer responses, or manuscript editing ethically
Table of Contents
Methodology and Academic Sources
This article is grounded primarily in Elsevier’s official Editorial Manager support material. Elsevier’s submission-status guidance for Editorial Manager states that Decision in Process begins when editors start entering a decision and explains that the manuscript can return to an earlier stage if additional review or editorial assignment is needed.
The broader workflow is supported by Elsevier’s submission and decision-process guidance, which describes initial editorial screening, peer review, editorial evaluation of reports, and possible outcomes such as revise, accept, reject, or transfer. Elsevier’s reviewer guidance also makes an important distinction: reviewers recommend, but the editor makes the final editorial decision. Finally, Elsevier’s publishing ethics policy emphasizes editorial responsibility and fair, unbiased peer review.
Exact workflows and visible status wording can vary by journal configuration, discipline, manuscript type, and editorial structure. Authors should therefore use their target journal’s Guide for Authors, editorial correspondence, and formal decision letter as the final operational instructions.
What “Decision in Process” Means in Elsevier Editorial Manager
It means the decision-making step has started inside the journal’s editorial system. The handling editor may have completed an initial assessment, received enough reviewer reports, or reached a point where the manuscript is ready for a decision to be drafted, checked, or confirmed. The key word is process: the editorial decision is being worked on, but it is not necessarily complete or communicated.
In a straightforward case, the handling editor may review the reports, select the decision category, prepare comments, and submit the decision. In another journal, the handling editor’s recommendation may need review by a senior editor, editor-in-chief, section editor, or editorial office. Elsevier specifically notes that some journals may require confirmation by multiple editors. This is one reason two manuscripts can remain in the same visible status for very different lengths of time.
The status also does not prove that peer review is permanently finished. If the editor sees conflicting reviewer recommendations, an unresolved methodological question, or a need for specialist expertise, the manuscript can be sent for additional review. Likewise, another editor may be assigned. In that situation, the status can move backward to an earlier label before a later decision is made.
Where Decision in Process Sits in the Elsevier Submission Workflow
Decision in Process normally appears near an editorial decision point, but the route to that point can differ. Many authors encounter a sequence such as submission checks, editor assignment, peer review, reviews complete, and then decision processing. However, not every journal uses identical labels or follows a perfectly linear path.
| Status | What it generally signals | What the author should do |
|---|---|---|
| With Editor | An editor is assessing the manuscript, assigning reviewers, or managing the editorial workflow. | Wait unless the journal requests information. |
| Under Review | Peer review is active or additional review activity is underway. | Avoid repeated enquiries during the normal review window. |
| Required Reviews Complete | The required number of review reports has been received, subject to the journal’s configuration. | Expect editorial evaluation; another review can still be requested. |
| Decision in Process | Editors have begun entering or confirming an editorial decision. | Wait for the formal decision email. |
| Revise | A revision decision has been issued and author action is expected. | Read the letter carefully and prepare a point-by-point revision. |
| Completed – Accept/Reject | The submission process has reached a final accept or reject disposition in Editorial Manager. | Follow production instructions after acceptance or evaluate next submission options after rejection. |
The table is a practical reading aid, not a promise that every Elsevier journal will display exactly the same sequence. Elsevier notes that status terms can be customized by journals, so the meaning of the formal decision letter always takes precedence over assumptions based on dashboard wording.
Does Decision in Process Mean Acceptance or Rejection?
No—there is no reliable way to infer the decision direction from this status alone. The status is used while the decision is being entered or confirmed, and that decision could be revise, accept, reject, or transfer. It can also be interrupted if the editor seeks another opinion.
Authors often search discussion boards for patterns such as “Decision in Process for one day means desk rejection” or “Decision in Process for a week means acceptance.” Such anecdotes are not dependable because journals differ in staffing, editor workload, meeting schedules, decision hierarchies, time zones, weekends, and the number of approvals required. Even two papers in the same journal can follow different internal paths.
Reviewer recommendations also should not be treated as votes. Elsevier’s reviewer guidance states that recommendations help the editor, but the final decision is the editor’s responsibility. Two positive reviews can still lead to revision if the editor identifies an issue, and mixed reports can lead to additional review rather than immediate rejection.
How Long Does Decision in Process Take in Elsevier?
There is no single standard duration that applies to all Elsevier journals. The decision may be completed quickly when the reports are clear and one editor has authority to decide. It may take longer when an editor needs to reconcile conflicting reviews, consult another editor, verify ethical or technical concerns, or wait for internal confirmation.
Instead of using an arbitrary number of days, compare the elapsed time with information published by the journal and with the timeline already visible in your manuscript history. A few extra days around weekends, holidays, conference periods, or editorial transitions may be routine. A longer delay still does not indicate a positive or negative outcome.
Factors that can lengthen the decision stage
- Conflicting or incomplete reviewer reports
- Need for an additional specialist review
- Multiple-editor approval or consultation
- Editor workload, leave, travel, or handover
- Questions about scope, ethics, data, figures, or reporting
- Editorial-office checks before the decision letter is released
- Journal-specific transfer or revision workflows
If the status is well beyond the journal’s usual decision period, a courteous enquiry is reasonable. Ask whether any action is required rather than demanding a decision date.
Why Can Decision in Process Go Back to Under Review?
A backward status change can be part of normal editorial quality control. Elsevier explicitly notes that, after the decision process begins, an editor may seek additional reviews or assign another editor, which can return the manuscript to an earlier status.
This can happen when two reviewers disagree strongly, when the editor needs expertise not covered by the initial reviewers, or when a revision introduces changes that warrant another technical assessment. It can also reflect an internal reassignment rather than a judgement about the paper’s quality.
Authors should not treat a return to Under Review as a hidden rejection. It means the editor is not ready to finalize the decision with the information currently available. The appropriate action is generally to wait unless the editorial office asks for a file, clarification, declaration, or other author response.
What Happens After Decision in Process?
The next meaningful event is the formal decision communication. Elsevier states that when the decision is finalized, the author receives an email containing the overall editorial decision, editor and/or reviewer comments, and further instructions. The possible next steps depend on that letter.
If the decision is revise
Read the editor’s letter before changing the manuscript. Separate mandatory editorial requests from reviewer suggestions, create a response matrix, and answer every point. Quote each comment briefly, explain what changed, and identify where the revision appears. If you disagree with a request, respond respectfully with evidence rather than ignoring it. Contentxprtz offers publication support when authors need help organizing a revision or reviewer-response package without replacing the author’s scholarly judgement.
If the decision is accept
Follow the journal’s production instructions. Acceptance can be followed by proofing, metadata checks, copyright or licensing steps, author queries, and production communication. Do not upload new scientific changes unless the journal specifically asks for them.
If the decision is reject
Read the reasons before resubmitting elsewhere. Some rejections are primarily about scope; others identify methodological, analytical, presentation, or novelty concerns. Preserve useful reviewer feedback, improve the manuscript where justified, and select a new journal based on fit rather than urgency alone.
If the decision is transfer
Review the recommended journal’s scope, indexing, audience, fees, and author guidelines before accepting a transfer. A transfer is an option, not an obligation.
Decision in Process After Major or Minor Revision
The meaning is fundamentally the same after a revision: the editor has begun processing the next decision. What differs is the evidence the editor is considering. After a minor revision, the editor may decide directly if the requested changes are clear. After a major revision, the paper may return to the original reviewers or new reviewers, depending on the journal and the nature of the changes.
Do not assume that a revised paper is guaranteed acceptance. A strong revision improves the manuscript’s chances of satisfying the editorial concerns, but the outcome still depends on the quality of the response, the revised evidence, journal standards, and editorial judgement. This is why a point-by-point response should be accurate, complete, calm, and easy to audit.
When Should You Contact the Elsevier Journal About the Status?
Contact the journal when the delay is meaningfully outside the journal’s normal timeline or when you have a genuine administrative reason—not simply because the status changed yesterday. A short period in Decision in Process usually indicates active editorial work.
Before writing, check the journal homepage, Guide for Authors, prior editorial emails, and any stated review or decision timelines. Confirm that the decision email has not landed in spam. If an enquiry is justified, contact the editorial office once and keep it concise.
What to include in a status enquiry
- Manuscript number
- Full manuscript title
- Corresponding author name
- Date of submission or revision
- Current visible status
- A courteous request asking whether any action is required from the author
Avoid interpreting the status in the email or asking the editor to reveal the likely outcome before the formal decision is ready.
What You Can Productively Do While Waiting
You can prepare for multiple outcomes without changing the submitted manuscript prematurely. Keep a clean editable copy of the manuscript, figures, tables, supplementary files, data-availability statement, conflict-of-interest statement, and reference library. If the paper has already been revised, maintain a version that clearly tracks what changed.
- Check citations and bibliographic consistency.
- Review figure labels, table captions, abbreviations, and terminology.
- Re-read the target journal’s author instructions.
- Organize reviewer comments from previous rounds.
- Prepare a response-to-reviewers template, but do not invent responses before seeing the actual decision.
- Identify language passages that may need clarification if revision is requested.
- Keep all research records and source files traceable.
If the eventual decision asks for substantial language or structure changes, academic editing services can help improve readability and consistency while preserving the author’s claims, data, and disciplinary meaning.
Practical Examples: How Authors Should Interpret the Status
Example 1: First-time author after peer review
A doctoral researcher sees Required Reviews Complete for three days and then Decision in Process. They assume acceptance because both reviewers had sounded constructive. The better interpretation is that the editor is now evaluating the reports and preparing a decision. Constructive reviews can still lead to major revision, and reviewer tone alone does not determine the outcome. The researcher should wait for the letter and avoid making speculative manuscript changes.
Example 2: Decision in Process returns to Under Review
An engineering paper moves to Decision in Process and then back to Under Review. The author worries that the journal found a serious problem. A more grounded explanation is that the editor may have requested another opinion or reassigned the manuscript. Elsevier’s own support guidance allows for this workflow. The author should monitor email and wait unless action is requested.
Example 3: Long decision stage after major revision
An ESL researcher submits a detailed major revision with a response document. The paper remains in Decision in Process longer than expected. Instead of repeatedly emailing, the author checks the journal’s usual timing, allows a reasonable margin, and then sends one concise status enquiry with the manuscript number and revision date. If another revision arrives, the author may seek professional editing for researchers to improve clarity without altering the scientific conclusions.
Common Mistakes to Avoid When You See Decision in Process
- Assuming it means acceptance. The status does not reveal the decision direction.
- Assuming it means rejection. The same label is used while different decisions are being processed.
- Using forum timing as a forecast. Anecdotes from other journals or manuscripts are not reliable predictors.
- Emailing the editor immediately. A status change often means the editorial team is already working on the manuscript.
- Submitting unsolicited new files. Wait until the journal asks for a revision or clarification.
- Ignoring a return to Under Review. Do not panic, but continue checking email in case an action request arrives.
- Preparing a defensive reviewer response. If revision is requested, address comments evidence-first and professionally.
- Letting publication anxiety drive journal switching. Do not withdraw solely because a decision stage takes longer than an anecdotal timeline.
Elsevier Decision-Stage Checklist for Authors
- Confirm the status in Editorial Manager and note the date it changed.
- Check the corresponding author’s inbox and spam folder for editorial communication.
- Review the journal’s author guidance and any published decision timelines.
- Do not interpret Decision in Process as acceptance or rejection.
- Keep the submitted manuscript and source files unchanged unless the journal asks for new material.
- Organize references, figures, tables, supplementary files, and previous reviewer comments.
- If revision is requested, create a point-by-point response before editing.
- Verify every claim, citation, and change; do not fabricate references or data to satisfy comments.
- If the status substantially exceeds the journal’s normal timeline, send one concise editorial-office enquiry.
- Use professional editing only to improve legitimate author-owned work and preserve author responsibility.
How Contentxprtz Can Help After an Elsevier Editorial Decision
Contentxprtz is most relevant when the decision letter identifies a communication or revision problem that requires careful manuscript work. Support can include language editing, research-paper editing, consistency checks, journal-format alignment, and structured reviewer-response preparation. The goal is to make the author’s reasoning clearer and the revision easier for editors and reviewers to evaluate.
Ethical support has boundaries. An editor should not invent results, manipulate data, fabricate references, write a misleading rebuttal, or promise journal acceptance. Authors remain responsible for the research, analysis, citations, interpretation, disclosures, and final submission. Where the journal requests substantive scientific changes, the author and research team must decide how to address them.
Summary: What Does Decision in Process Mean Elsevier?
Decision in Process means Elsevier journal editors have begun entering or confirming a decision in Editorial Manager. It is not a hidden acceptance or rejection message. The status can lead to revise, accept, reject, or transfer, and it can sometimes return to an earlier stage if another review or editor is needed.
There is no universal duration for the status. Journal configuration, editor availability, report quality, conflicting recommendations, and internal approval steps can all affect timing. Authors should rely on the formal decision letter, not status folklore. While waiting, keep files organized and prepare to respond carefully if revision is requested. If the delay is substantially beyond the journal’s normal window, a concise, respectful enquiry is appropriate.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does decision in process mean Elsevier?
In Elsevier Editorial Manager, Decision in Process means the editors have begun entering an editorial decision in the system. It usually appears when the manuscript has reached a point where the editor can start deciding, but it does not tell the author whether the outcome will be accept, revise, reject, or transfer. Elsevier also explains that some journals require confirmation by multiple editors and that an editor may decide to seek additional reviews or assign another editor. If that happens, the manuscript can return to an earlier status. The practical action is to wait for the formal decision email, which will contain the overall editorial outcome, editor and/or reviewer comments, and next-step instructions.
Is Decision in Process a good sign in Elsevier?
Decision in Process is neither a positive nor a negative prediction. It tells you that the editorial team has entered an active decision stage, but the label does not disclose the direction of that decision. An editor may be weighing reviewer reports, journal scope, methods, novelty, reporting quality, or conflicting recommendations. Different journals also use different internal approval workflows, so the duration of the status cannot reliably predict the result. Avoid interpreting a short or long stay as evidence of acceptance or rejection. The formal decision letter is the authoritative source.
Does Decision in Process mean my paper is accepted?
No. Decision in Process does not mean acceptance. Elsevier describes several possible outcomes after editorial assessment, including revise, accept, reject, or transfer. The status only indicates that editors have begun the decision workflow. Acceptance becomes clear when the journal issues the acceptance decision and corresponding instructions. Until then, avoid telling co-authors or institutions that the paper is accepted based solely on the dashboard status. If accepted, follow the production communication that comes after the editorial decision.
Does Decision in Process mean rejection?
No. The same status can appear before rejection, revision, acceptance, transfer, or a return to review. Because Editorial Manager displays Decision in Process while an editor is entering or confirming a decision, authors cannot infer the outcome from the label. Reviewer recommendations are also not binding votes; Elsevier states that the editor makes the final editorial decision. Wait for the decision email and read the editor’s reasoning before deciding what to do next.
How long does Decision in Process take in Elsevier?
There is no single Elsevier-wide duration for Decision in Process. Timing can vary because journals have different editorial structures, workloads, approval rules, and review practices. A decision may take longer if reviewer reports conflict, another specialist opinion is needed, multiple editors must confirm the decision, or the editorial office needs additional checks. Compare your waiting time with the target journal’s stated or typical decision timeline rather than forum anecdotes. If the manuscript remains unchanged substantially longer than expected, send one courteous enquiry asking whether any author action is required.
Can Elsevier status change from Decision in Process back to Under Review?
Yes. Elsevier’s support guidance states that editors may decide to seek additional reviews or assign another editor after a decision has begun, which can return the manuscript to an earlier status. A return to Under Review therefore does not automatically indicate rejection or a problem. It can simply mean that the editor wants more evidence before finalizing the decision. Continue monitoring the corresponding author’s email and provide information only if the journal requests it.
What happens after Decision in Process in Elsevier Editorial Manager?
When the editor finalizes the decision, the corresponding author normally receives a direct email with the overall decision, editor and/or reviewer comments, and instructions. If the outcome is revise, prepare a point-by-point response and revised manuscript. If accepted, follow production instructions. If rejected, evaluate the reasons and improve the paper before selecting another suitable journal. If transfer is recommended, assess the proposed journal’s scope and requirements before accepting. The decision letter—not the dashboard label—determines the next action.
Should I email the editor when my paper is in Decision in Process?
Usually not immediately. Decision in Process indicates that active editorial work is underway. First check the journal’s expected timeline, your submission history, and your inbox. If the status remains unchanged well beyond the journal’s normal decision period, a concise enquiry is reasonable. Include the manuscript number, manuscript title, corresponding author name, submission or revision date, and current status. Ask whether any action is required from you. Avoid pressuring the editor for an outcome or sending repeated enquiries in short intervals.
What should I prepare while waiting for the Elsevier decision?
Keep your editable manuscript, figures, tables, supplementary files, references, data statements, and prior correspondence organized. If you have already completed a revision, preserve a clean response matrix showing how earlier comments were addressed. You can check citation consistency, terminology, figure labels, and journal formatting, but do not upload unsolicited replacement files or rewrite the submitted paper speculatively. If a revision arrives, read the full letter first, then create a response plan that separates scientific changes from language and presentation changes.
Can professional editing help after an Elsevier decision?
Yes, when the decision letter calls for clearer language, stronger organization, consistent terminology, journal-specific formatting, or a more structured response to reviewers. Ethical editing should improve communication without inventing data, changing results to satisfy reviewers, fabricating citations, or replacing the author’s scholarly judgement. Contentxprtz can support manuscript editing and reviewer-response clarity, but authors remain responsible for the research, claims, revisions, disclosures, and final submission. No legitimate editing service can guarantee acceptance or publication.
Conclusion: Read the Status as a Workflow Signal, Not a Verdict
The main problem with Decision in Process is uncertainty, not hidden meaning. In practical terms, it means the Elsevier journal’s editors have begun the decision workflow. Self-service monitoring is usually enough while the manuscript remains within a reasonable journal timeline. Authors should resist trying to decode the outcome from the number of days, reviewer anecdotes, or a temporary return to Under Review.
When the decision letter arrives, the right next step becomes clearer. A simple minor revision may be manageable without outside help. A complex major revision, detailed reviewer response, language problem, or publication-readiness issue may benefit from expert-assisted academic editing. Any support should strengthen clarity, structure, consistency, and ethical communication without replacing the author’s research judgement or responsibility.
Contentxprtz supports researchers who need publication-focused editing and revision assistance while preserving academic integrity and author ownership. “At Contentxprtz, we don’t just edit; we help ideas reach their fullest potential.”
