Understanding Desk Revision Requests from Journal Editors

Introduction

Not all editorial decisions fit neatly into “accept,” “revise,” or “reject.” Increasingly, authors receive desk revision requests, where editors ask for changes before sending a manuscript to peer review. These decisions often confuse authors and are sometimes misinterpreted as rejections.

In reality, desk revision requests signal editorial interest—but with conditions. This article explains what desk revision requests mean, why editors use them, and how authors should respond effectively.

What Is a Desk Revision Request?

A desk revision request occurs when:

• The editor has screened the manuscript
• Peer review has not yet begun
• Specific changes are required before further consideration

It sits between desk rejection and peer review.

Why Editors Issue Desk Revisions

Editors use desk revisions to:

• Improve scope alignment
• Clarify novelty or contribution
• Address structural or presentation issues
• Ensure policy compliance

They help editors manage reviewer workload efficiently.

Common Reasons for Desk Revisions

Typical triggers include:

• Weak or unclear abstract
• Scope ambiguity
• Insufficient framing of contribution
• Formatting or policy non‑compliance

These issues are usually fixable.

Desk Revision vs Desk Rejection

Desk revision is a positive signal.

How Authors Should Respond

Authors should:

1. Read editor comments carefully
2. Revise exactly as requested
3. Avoid unnecessary additional changes
4. Respond promptly and professionally

Precision matters more than speed.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

Avoid:

• Ignoring editor priorities
• Over‑defensive explanations
• Major scope changes without approval

Conclusion

Desk revision requests reflect editorial engagement. When handled carefully, they significantly improve chances of entering peer review. Authors who respond strategically turn desk revisions into opportunities.