My Journal Paper Status Changed Directly from “With Editor” to “Decision in Process”: A Complete Guide for Researchers

By Dr. Aanya Mehta
Research Writer & Professional Business Communicator

If your journal paper status changed directly from “With Editor” to “Decision in Process,” it is understandable to wonder whether the manuscript has been accepted, rejected, sent for peer review without the system showing it, or is simply waiting for an editor to complete an administrative step.

The most important point is this: “Decision in Process” usually means that an editorial decision is being prepared, recorded, approved, or communicated, but the status alone does not tell you what that decision will be. Depending on the journal, submission platform, editorial workflow, manuscript stage, and editor’s assessment, the eventual outcome could be rejection, revision, acceptance, transfer, or another journal-specific decision.

A direct movement from “With Editor” to “Decision in Process” can occur for several reasons. An editor may have concluded that external peer review is unnecessary. A journal may use internal editorial consultation before deciding whether a paper should proceed. Reviewer activity may not always be represented through the exact status labels visible to authors. In a revised submission, the editor may also decide that the manuscript can be assessed without another full review round.

Large scholarly publishers make clear that manuscript workflows contain several editorial stages and that the statuses visible to authors depend on the publishing system. Elsevier, for example, provides specific guidance explaining the manuscript statuses displayed in Editorial Manager, while Springer Nature describes a process that can include initial checks, editor assignment, peer review, revisions, and editorial decisions.

Therefore, the safest interpretation is not “this means rejection” or “this means acceptance.” It is simply:

A decision-related editorial action is underway. Wait for the formal decision letter before drawing conclusions.

This guide explains what the status can mean, why a manuscript may move directly from “With Editor” to “Decision in Process,” what outcomes may follow, when you should contact the journal, and how to prepare for the next step without unnecessary speculation.

Quick Answer: What Does “With Editor” to “Decision in Process” Mean?

If your manuscript has moved directly from “With Editor” to “Decision in Process,” the journal’s editorial workflow has probably reached a point where an editor or editorial team is processing a decision.

It does not automatically mean rejection. It also does not confirm acceptance.

The editor may be:

• Making an initial editorial decision before external peer review.
• Finalising a decision after an internal assessment.
• Considering whether the manuscript fits the journal.
• Processing a decision following a revised submission.
• Reviewing available referee reports if peer review has already occurred.
• Obtaining approval from another editor.
• Preparing the decision letter in the submission system.

Elsevier notes that Editorial Manager contains multiple manuscript statuses representing different points in the submission process, while Springer Nature similarly describes editorial workflows as progressing through several stages before a final decision is communicated.

Your next step is usually to wait for the official decision email or letter rather than interpret the status as a definite outcome.

Key Takeaways

• “Decision in Process” is not the same as rejection. The decision remains unknown until the journal communicates it.
• A direct transition from “With Editor” to “Decision in Process” can indicate an editorial decision without external peer review, but that is only one possibility.
• Journal-management systems and publishers use status terminology differently.
• If this is a revised manuscript, the editor may sometimes make a decision without sending it through another complete review cycle.
• Status changes may reflect workflow actions rather than every substantive activity occurring behind the scenes.
• Do not withdraw, resubmit elsewhere, or contact multiple editors simply because the status changed.
• If the status remains unchanged considerably longer than the journal’s normal processing time, a polite inquiry to the editorial office may be appropriate.

What This Page Covers

This guide explains:

• What “With Editor” normally indicates.
• What “Decision in Process” may mean.
• Why a paper can move between these statuses without displaying “Under Review.”
• Whether the change suggests rejection or acceptance.
• How the interpretation changes for new versus revised manuscripts.
• What you should do while waiting.
• When it is reasonable to contact the journal.

Table of Contents

1. What does “With Editor” mean?
2. What does “Decision in Process” mean?
3. Why did my paper move directly between these statuses?
4. Does it mean desk rejection?
5. Could it mean acceptance?
6. New submission versus revised manuscript
7. How journal submission systems affect status interpretation
8. What happens after “Decision in Process”?
9. How long should you wait?
10. When should you contact the journal?
11. What not to do
12. Practical manuscript-status scenarios
13. How to prepare for each possible decision
14. Researcher checklist
15. How Contentxprtz can support researchers
16. Summary
17. FAQs
18. About the Author
19. Conclusion

Methodology and Academic Sources

This guide combines practical scholarly-publishing principles with publicly available information from established publishing and manuscript-management organizations.

For example, Elsevier maintains guidance explaining submission statuses in Editorial Manager and how authors can track manuscripts, while Springer Nature explains its post-submission editorial process and online status tracking. ScholarOne is another widely used manuscript workflow platform, and its workflow can differ according to the journal’s configuration.

The terminology displayed by your particular journal may therefore differ from the terminology described here. Always treat your journal’s own author instructions, editorial-office communication, and formal decision letter as the authoritative sources for your manuscript.

What Does “With Editor” Mean?

“With Editor” generally indicates that your manuscript is currently being handled or assessed by an editor.

At this stage, the editor may be evaluating matters such as:

• Relevance to the journal’s scope.
• Overall scholarly suitability.
• Basic quality and presentation.
• Novelty or contribution.
• Compliance with submission requirements.
• Whether specialist peer review should be initiated.
• Whether another editor should handle the manuscript.

Springer Nature describes an editorial process that begins with initial quality checks and proceeds through editorial and peer-review stages as appropriate.

The exact work taking place during “With Editor” varies considerably.

For one journal, it might mean that an editor has only recently received your paper.

For another, it might mean that the editor has already performed a substantial initial assessment.

For still another, the editor may be consulting an associate editor or editorial-board member.

Consequently, the words “With Editor” should not be interpreted as evidence that your paper is progressing positively or negatively.

It describes a workflow stage rather than an outcome.

What Does “Decision in Process” Mean?

“Decision in Process” generally indicates that the journal is working on a decision concerning the manuscript.

This may involve the handling editor selecting or recommending a decision, a senior editor approving that recommendation, the editorial office checking the decision, or the manuscript-management system generating a decision communication.

The important word is “process.”

The decision may be moving through an internal workflow rather than already being final and visible to the author.

Depending on the journal, the next communication might be:

• Reject.
• Reject and resubmit.
• Major revision.
• Minor revision.
• Accept.
• Transfer to another journal.
• Another publisher- or journal-specific outcome.

Some editorial systems use more granular status labels than others. Authors should therefore avoid assuming that a particular status has an identical meaning across every journal.

Why Did My Journal Paper Status Change Directly from “With Editor” to “Decision in Process”?

There are several reasonable explanations.

1. The Editor May Be Making a Decision Before Peer Review

One common possibility is an editorial decision made during initial assessment.

Editors regularly assess manuscripts before inviting external referees. A manuscript may not progress to peer review if the editor determines that it is unsuitable for that particular journal.

Possible considerations include:

• Scope mismatch.
• Limited fit with the journal’s readership.
• Insufficient contribution for that journal.
• Methodological concerns apparent during initial assessment.
• Manuscript type not matching journal requirements.
• Presentation problems that prevent meaningful assessment.

Springer Nature notes that manuscripts may be rejected for technical or editorial reasons, reinforcing the fact that rejection can occur at different points in journal evaluation.

However, the status sequence alone cannot establish that desk rejection has occurred.

2. The Journal May Use an Internal Editorial Review

Some papers are considered by more than one editor before a decision is issued.

For example, a handling editor might make a recommendation that requires approval from:

• An associate editor.
• A section editor.
• A deputy editor.
• An editor-in-chief.
• An editorial office.

The author-facing status may simply move to “Decision in Process” while that internal activity takes place.

3. The Submission System May Not Display Every Workflow Step

Authors sometimes assume that every editorial action must generate a visible status change. That is not necessarily the case.

Manuscript-management platforms are workflow tools, and journal configurations can differ.

ScholarOne, for example, is used by publishers and scholarly organizations to manage submissions and peer review, while Editorial Manager is another major submission platform. The workflow and terminology authors see can therefore depend on both the software and the journal’s configuration.

4. Your Revised Manuscript May Not Need Another Full Review Round

The meaning can be quite different if you submitted a revision rather than an original manuscript.

Suppose reviewers previously requested changes and you submitted:

• A revised manuscript.
• A point-by-point response letter.
• Highlighted changes.
• Additional analysis requested by reviewers.

The editor might determine that the revisions adequately address the comments without returning the manuscript to every reviewer.

In that situation, movement from an editor-related status to a decision-related status may be entirely normal.

5. The Editor May Have Enough Information to Decide

Editors do not necessarily need to repeat every preceding stage before each decision.

If sufficient information is already available—from earlier reviews, previous revision rounds, editorial assessment, or journal policy—the editor may proceed toward a decision.

Again, this does not tell you whether that decision will be favorable.

Does “Decision in Process” After “With Editor” Mean Desk Rejection?

It can indicate a desk rejection, particularly for a new submission that has never entered external peer review, but you cannot reliably conclude this from the status alone.

A desk rejection occurs when an editor decides not to send a manuscript for external peer review.

Reasons can include journal fit, priority, contribution, methodology, presentation, or other journal-specific editorial considerations.

A direct sequence such as:

Submission → Initial Checks → With Editor → Decision in Process

may be consistent with a pre-review editorial decision.

But “consistent with” is not the same as “proof of.”

The journal may also use:

• Internal reviewers.
• Editorial-board consultation.
• Status labels that hide intermediate processes.
• Different workflows for different manuscript categories.

Therefore, avoid statements such as:

“Decision in Process means my paper has definitely been desk rejected.”

A more accurate interpretation is:

“The manuscript appears to have reached a decision stage, possibly before external review. I need to wait for the decision letter to know the outcome.”

Could “Decision in Process” Mean Acceptance?

Yes, in some circumstances—especially after one or more review and revision rounds—but the status itself does not mean acceptance.

For a first submission that has only recently been assigned to an editor, immediate acceptance would usually be an unusual assumption.

For a revised submission, however, a decision stage may follow:

• Major revision.
• Minor revision.
• Reviewer reassessment.
• Editorial reassessment.

Springer Nature explains that once an acceptance decision has actually been made in its workflow, the manuscript proceeds toward production.

Until your journal explicitly communicates acceptance, however, you should continue treating the manuscript as under editorial consideration.

New Submission vs Revised Manuscript: Why Context Changes the Meaning

The same status can carry different practical implications depending on where you are in the publication journey.

Situation	What “Decision in Process” May Indicate	What You Should Conclude
Brand-new submission, no peer review	Initial editorial decision may be approaching	Outcome unknown
New manuscript after lengthy editor handling	Editor may have completed assessment or consultation	Outcome unknown
Manuscript previously under peer review	Editor may be assessing reviewer recommendations	Decision likely approaching
Revised manuscript after major revision	Editor may be assessing revisions or obtaining further reviews	Outcome unknown
Revised manuscript after minor revision	Editor may be able to decide directly	Acceptance is possible, but not confirmed
Multiple review rounds completed	Final editorial evaluation may be underway	Wait for formal letter

The practical lesson is simple:

Never interpret a status without considering the manuscript’s entire submission history.

How Journal Submission Systems Affect Status Interpretation

Researchers commonly encounter platforms such as Editorial Manager and ScholarOne, as well as publisher-specific submission systems.

These systems are designed to support complex editorial workflows. They are not necessarily designed to give authors a minute-by-minute account of every action.

Elsevier provides a dedicated explanation of submission statuses shown in Editorial Manager and separately explains how authors can track submitted articles.

Springer Nature similarly allows corresponding or submitting authors to track manuscript progress online and explains that the process continues through editorial stages until a decision is made.

This leads to an important rule:

Do not compare status wording across journals as though it were standardized

A colleague may tell you:

“My paper showed that status just before acceptance.”

Another researcher might say:

“Mine was rejected the next day.”

Both experiences may be genuine—and neither predicts your result.

They could involve different:

• Publishers.
• Journals.
• Editors.
• Article types.
• Submission systems.
• Review histories.
• Editorial configurations.

Personal anecdotes are useful for understanding possibilities, but they are weak evidence for predicting an individual manuscript decision.

What Usually Happens After “Decision in Process”?

The most likely next meaningful event is a formal editorial communication.

Depending on the journal, you may receive an email inviting you to log into the submission portal, or the decision letter may be available directly in your author dashboard.

Possible outcome 1: Rejection

If the paper is rejected, read the editor’s comments carefully before submitting elsewhere.

Determine whether the rejection is primarily about:

• Journal fit.
• Priority.
• Methodology.
• Contribution.
• Writing quality.
• Reporting.
• Literature positioning.
• Technical requirements.

A rejection from one journal does not automatically establish that the research itself has no value.

Possible outcome 2: Major Revision

A major revision usually requires substantial work.

Create a structured response plan:

1. Read the editor’s letter completely.
2. Separate editor comments from reviewer comments.
3. Create a numbered response document.
4. Address every point.
5. Explain respectfully when you do not adopt a suggestion.
6. Revise the manuscript consistently.
7. Check tables, figures, citations, and supplementary files.
8. Proofread the final package before resubmission.

Possible outcome 3: Minor Revision

Do not treat “minor” as permission to respond casually.

Even relatively small requests should be answered clearly and completely.

Possible outcome 4: Acceptance

If your manuscript is accepted, follow the journal’s production instructions carefully.

At this point, you may later need to review proofs, author information, declarations, and publication-related documentation according to the publisher’s process.

Possible outcome 5: Transfer or Alternative Recommendation

Some publishers may recommend transferring a manuscript to another journal.

Evaluate:

• Scope.
• Audience.
• Journal reputation.
• Indexing relevant to your field.
• Publication model.
• Fees where applicable.
• Whether existing reviews may transfer.

Do not accept a transfer automatically without checking whether the destination journal genuinely suits your research.

How Long Does “Decision in Process” Take?

There is no universal duration.

It might change quickly, or it might remain visible while internal editorial activities are completed.

Timing can depend on:

• Editor availability.
• Journal workload.
• Whether another editor must approve the decision.
• Weekend or holiday periods.
• Administrative processing.
• Complexity of the manuscript.
• Number and consistency of reviewer reports.
• Whether the decision letter needs additional editorial input.

For this reason, avoid relying on forum claims such as:

• “If it lasts more than two days, it means rejection.”
• “If it changes in 24 hours, you are accepted.”
• “A seven-day decision stage always means another editor is involved.”

These are not reliable universal rules.

Should I Contact the Journal While It Says “Decision in Process”?

Usually, not immediately.

A decision-related status often means the manuscript is already moving through an internal process. Contacting the journal within hours or a few days generally does not accelerate that process.

Consider contacting the editorial office if:

• The status remains unchanged substantially longer than the journal’s stated or typical decision timeframe.
• You have an important administrative reason to obtain an update.
• The journal specifically encourages status inquiries after a certain period.
• You suspect a technical problem with the manuscript-management system.
• You have received conflicting instructions.

Springer Nature provides routes for manuscript-status queries and contacting journal editorial offices, illustrating that publishers have established channels for such questions.

If you do write, keep the message concise and professional.

Include:

• Manuscript ID.
• Manuscript title.
• Submission or revision date.
• Current displayed status.
• A polite request for an update.

Avoid asking whether the paper has been accepted before the decision has formally been issued.

What You Should Not Do While Waiting

Do not submit the same manuscript to another journal

Unless you have formally withdrawn the manuscript and the withdrawal has been completed according to journal procedure, simultaneous submission can violate journal policies and scholarly publishing norms.

Do not email multiple editors

Sending the same inquiry to the editor-in-chief, associate editor, managing editor, publisher, and editorial office at the same time can create unnecessary confusion.

Do not assume rejection and rewrite the paper immediately

You may soon receive specific editorial or reviewer instructions. Wait for the actual decision unless there is an independent reason to improve the manuscript.

Do not assume acceptance and announce publication

A decision-related status is not an acceptance letter.

Do not repeatedly refresh the submission system

Checking occasionally is reasonable. Checking every few minutes does not provide additional information and can amplify publication anxiety.

Three Practical Manuscript-Status Scenarios

Scenario 1: New Paper Moves Quickly from “With Editor” to “Decision in Process”

A researcher submits a manuscript on Monday.

After technical checks, the paper shows “With Editor.” Two days later, it changes to “Decision in Process,” without ever displaying “Under Review.”

What might be happening?

A pre-review editorial decision is one plausible explanation. The editor may have assessed the manuscript’s suitability and decided whether it should proceed.

What should the researcher do?

Wait for the decision letter.

Do not assume rejection until the letter arrives.

If rejection does occur, use the editor’s explanation to determine whether the next step is manuscript revision, journal reselection, or both.

Scenario 2: Revised Paper Goes from “With Editor” to “Decision in Process”

A researcher previously received a minor revision request. The revised manuscript and response letter were submitted three weeks later. The manuscript then moved to “With Editor” and shortly afterward to “Decision in Process.”

What might be happening?

The editor may be deciding whether the revisions adequately address the earlier concerns.

Another full review round may or may not be necessary.

What should the researcher do?

Wait for the formal decision rather than interpreting the absence of a new “Under Review” status negatively.

Scenario 3: Paper Has Already Completed Peer Review

A manuscript was under review for several weeks. Reviewer reports were completed, and the paper eventually returned to an editor-related status before showing “Decision in Process.”

What might be happening?

The editor may now be evaluating the reports and deciding whether to reject the paper, request revisions, or take another action.

What should the researcher do?

Prepare mentally and practically for a detailed decision letter. If revisions are requested, respond systematically rather than beginning changes based on assumptions.

Before-and-After Interpretations: Avoid These Common Assumptions

Unhelpful interpretation:
“My manuscript skipped Under Review, so it is definitely rejected.”

Better interpretation:
“My manuscript appears to have reached an editorial decision stage. Because journal workflows differ, I will wait for the formal decision.”

---

Unhelpful interpretation:
“Decision in Process means the editor has accepted my paper.”

Better interpretation:
“A decision is being processed, but acceptance is not confirmed until the journal explicitly communicates it.”

---

Unhelpful interpretation:
“Someone online received rejection after this status, so I will too.”

Better interpretation:
“Another author’s experience involved a particular journal, workflow, and manuscript. It cannot reliably predict my outcome.”

---

Unhelpful interpretation:
“The status changed yesterday, so I should email the editor today.”

Better interpretation:
“I should allow the normal editorial process to run unless the journal’s stated timeframe has clearly been exceeded or there is another legitimate reason to contact the office.”

How to Prepare for Every Possible Decision

Waiting does not mean you have to do nothing.

You can prepare productively without trying to predict the editor’s decision.

If the manuscript is rejected

Be ready to:

• Read all comments calmly.
• Separate journal-fit concerns from research-quality concerns.
• Correct weaknesses that would affect another submission.
• Reassess your journal selection.
• Reformat the manuscript only after choosing the next journal.

If revisions are requested

Prepare to:

• Create a reviewer-response table.
• Track every requested change.
• Cite page and line numbers where possible.
• Explain disagreements professionally.
• Check consistency across the abstract, methods, results, discussion, tables, and supplementary files.

If the language, structure, or reviewer response requires professional refinement, ethical research paper editing support can help improve clarity while preserving the researcher’s intellectual ownership.

If the paper is accepted

Check:

• Author names and affiliations.
• Corresponding-author details.
• Funding information.
• Conflict-of-interest statements.
• Figure quality.
• References.
• Proof corrections.
• Publisher correspondence.

Researcher Checklist: When Your Status Changes to “Decision in Process”

Use this checklist before taking any action:

• Have I confirmed the exact status shown in the journal portal?
• Is this a new submission or a revised manuscript?
• Has the manuscript previously undergone external peer review?
• Have I received any email from the editorial office?
• Have I checked the journal’s own status guidance?
• Am I avoiding conclusions based only on other researchers’ anecdotes?
• Have I avoided interpreting the status as confirmed acceptance?
• Have I avoided interpreting it as confirmed rejection?
• Is the manuscript still within a reasonable editorial timeframe?
• If I need to contact the journal, can I send one concise, professional inquiry?
• Am I prepared to respond constructively to whatever decision arrives?

Common Mistakes Researchers Make When Reading Journal Statuses

Mistake 1: Treating a workflow label as a decision

Correction: Wait for the formal decision letter.

Mistake 2: Assuming all journals use identical status terminology

Correction: Check information from your specific publisher and journal.

Mistake 3: Comparing unrelated submission histories

A first-round manuscript cannot always be compared meaningfully with someone else’s third-round revision.

Correction: Interpret the status within your own manuscript timeline.

Mistake 4: Assuming skipped statuses mean skipped processes

Author dashboards may not expose every internal action.

Correction: Treat displayed statuses as indicators rather than a complete audit trail.

Mistake 5: Contacting the editor immediately after every change

Correction: Allow a reasonable processing period unless there is a genuine problem.

Mistake 6: Preparing an emotional response before reading the decision

Correction: Read the complete decision letter first. If reviewer comments are provided, assess them systematically.

Mistake 7: Resubmitting elsewhere before the process is complete

Correction: Keep the manuscript with one journal at a time unless the original submission has been formally withdrawn according to appropriate procedures.

How Contentxprtz Can Help After You Receive the Decision

The most useful time to seek editorial support is often after you know what the journal actually requires.

Contentxprtz provides academic communication and publication-support services for researchers who may need help improving a manuscript while retaining responsibility for their research, claims, data, interpretation, citations, and final submission.

Depending on the editorial outcome, relevant support may include:

• Manuscript language editing.
• Academic proofreading.
• Structural and clarity review.
• Journal-specific formatting checks.
• Response-to-reviewer language refinement.
• Consistency checks after revision.
• Thesis or dissertation editing when journal articles form part of broader doctoral work.

Researchers preparing a revised journal manuscript can explore research paper editing services.

For broader manuscript clarity and scholarly presentation, academic editing support may also be relevant.

Professional editing should improve communication rather than replace the researcher’s intellectual contribution. Researchers remain responsible for the validity of their arguments, methods, data, references, interpretation, and final submission, and institutional policies concerning editorial or AI assistance should always be followed.

Summary: My Journal Paper Status Changed Directly from “With Editor” to “Decision in Process”

If your journal paper status changed directly from “With Editor” to “Decision in Process,” the most defensible interpretation is that an editorial decision is currently being handled or finalized.

It does not reveal the outcome.

For a new paper that has not undergone peer review, a pre-review editorial decision is one possibility. For a manuscript that has already been reviewed or revised, the editor may be considering reviewer reports, evaluating your revisions, or finalizing the next decision.

Submission-system terminology also varies. Editorial Manager, ScholarOne, Springer Nature platforms, and individual journal configurations do not necessarily expose identical stages to authors.

The correct response is generally straightforward:

1. Check your email and manuscript portal.
2. Review any journal-specific status guidance.
3. Do not assume acceptance or rejection.
4. Allow a reasonable period for the decision workflow.
5. Contact the editorial office politely only if the delay becomes unusual.
6. Act on the formal decision—not the status label.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What does it mean when my journal paper status changes directly from “With Editor” to “Decision in Process”?

It generally means that the manuscript has entered a decision-related editorial stage. An editor may be making, recommending, approving, or preparing a decision for communication.

It does not reveal whether the eventual result will be acceptance, revision, or rejection. If the manuscript is new and has never been externally reviewed, an initial editorial decision is one possibility. If it is a revised manuscript, the editor may be deciding whether the revisions are sufficient.

Because submission platforms and journal workflows vary, the formal decision letter is much more informative than the status label itself.

2. Does “Decision in Process” mean my paper has been rejected?

No. “Decision in Process” does not, by itself, mean rejection.

A rejection may eventually follow, especially if the manuscript has not undergone external review, but revision, acceptance, transfer, or another editorial outcome may also be possible depending on the paper’s history.

The safest approach is to wait until the journal issues its official decision.

3. Does “Decision in Process” mean acceptance?

No. The status alone does not confirm acceptance.

Acceptance is confirmed when the journal explicitly sends an acceptance decision. Springer Nature, for example, explains that once an acceptance decision has actually been made in its workflow, the accepted manuscript can proceed toward production.

A revised manuscript moving quickly toward a decision may be encouraging in some circumstances, but researchers should avoid treating timing or status patterns as proof.

4. Why did my manuscript never show “Under Review”?

Several explanations are possible.

The editor may be making an initial decision without external peer review. Alternatively, the author-facing portal may not display every internal workflow action, or the journal may use terminology that differs from what you have seen elsewhere.

If the paper has previously undergone review, the editor may also decide that another external review round is unnecessary.

Do not assume that the absence of a particular status tells you exactly what occurred internally.

5. How long does “Decision in Process” usually take?

There is no reliable universal duration.

The decision may be processed quickly or may require additional internal steps. Timing can depend on journal workload, editor availability, editorial approval procedures, administrative checks, holidays, manuscript complexity, and the journal’s submission system.

If the journal publishes expected processing times, use those rather than anecdotal timelines from unrelated journals.

6. Should I email the editor when the status changes to “Decision in Process”?

Usually not immediately.

If the decision process has just started, giving the editorial team reasonable time to complete it is normally appropriate. Contact the journal if the status persists significantly beyond its expected timeframe, if the publisher instructs authors to inquire after a particular period, or if there is another legitimate administrative concern.

Keep any inquiry brief, respectful, and factual.

7. Is a fast decision after “With Editor” a bad sign?

Not necessarily.

For a new submission, a rapid decision may indicate that the editor was able to assess the manuscript without external review. However, speed alone cannot reveal the outcome.

For a revised paper, a quick decision may simply mean the editor already knows the manuscript well and can assess the changes efficiently.

Do not use turnaround time as a substitute for the actual decision letter.

8. What if “Decision in Process” appears after peer review?

If external review has already occurred, the editor may be assessing reviewer reports and preparing the editorial decision.

Possible outcomes can include major revision, minor revision, rejection, acceptance, or another journal-specific decision.

At this stage, preparing yourself to respond systematically to reviewer feedback is more productive than trying to predict whether the outcome will be positive or negative.

9. Can the status change back from “Decision in Process” to another editorial status?

Journal workflows can change as editors take further action, and system behavior depends on the journal and submission platform.

For example, an editor may determine that additional assessment is required before a final decision can be issued. Therefore, a decision-related status should not be treated as irreversible evidence of a particular result.

The formal communication from the journal remains the authoritative source.

10. What should I do after learning how to interpret “With Editor” and “Decision in Process”?

First, wait for the journal’s formal decision. Then respond according to the actual outcome.

If revision is requested, create a systematic response to every editor and reviewer comment. Check that manuscript changes are accurate, consistent, clearly explained, and properly reflected in your response letter.

If language or presentation is preventing you from communicating your research effectively, professional research paper editing support can help refine the manuscript while preserving your ideas and responsibility for the work.

About the Author

Dr. Aanya Mehta
Research Writer & Professional Business Communicator

Dr. Aanya Mehta is a research-oriented writer and professional communicator with a strong focus on accuracy, clarity, and evidence-based insight. Her work combines analytical thinking with accessible writing, helping readers understand complex business topics through well-researched, credible, and practical content.

Conclusion

A manuscript moving directly from “With Editor” to “Decision in Process” can feel significant because it suggests that the editorial workflow has advanced. What it does not provide is the result itself.

“With Editor” generally reflects editorial handling or assessment. “Decision in Process” indicates that a decision-related activity is underway. Depending on the manuscript’s stage, this could follow an initial editorial assessment, completed peer review, a revision, or another journal-specific process.

The best approach is therefore evidence-based rather than speculative:

• Review your manuscript’s complete status history.
• Recognize that journal workflows differ.
• Do not assume rejection.
• Do not assume acceptance.
• Wait for the formal decision.
• Read the editor’s letter carefully.
• Respond professionally to whatever action is requested.

If the manuscript requires substantial revision, careful self-review may be sufficient when the issues are straightforward. When clarity, language, structure, journal presentation, or response-to-reviewer communication needs additional refinement, ethical academic editing can provide a useful second layer of review without replacing the researcher’s own intellectual contribution.

Contentxprtz has supported academic communication since 2010 and provides research and publication-focused editing assistance to researchers internationally. Researchers who need manuscript-specific support can explore its research paper editing service.

The most important lesson is simple: a manuscript status is a workflow signal, not a decision letter. Let the journal tell you the outcome before deciding what the status “must” mean.

“At Contentxprtz, we don’t just edit; we help ideas reach their fullest potential.”