If you wish to appeal a decision, take the time to research that journals appeal process and review and address the points raised by the reviewer to prepare a reasoned and logical response. Is the research replicable, reproducible, and robust? When editors, reviewers, and authors have put time into critiquing and improving a paper, it just seems downright unfair to reject the paper. Take for instance how one of the internships I had while still in college was very hands-on. The closest I've gotten to a direct in was a request to shorten an already brief manuscript so it could fit as a brief communication versus a full-length. A paper may be rejected because of problems with the research on which it is based. Peregrin, T. (2007). It means the journal editor likes something about your paper. In this step, the editor carefully evaluates all the comments by the peer-reviewers and examines the manuscript. While this may be difficult for you as an author, the criticism received is not intended to be personal. Does the title properly reflect the subject of the paper? If the authors resubmit their article to another journal, the time taken for peer review process and final publication will probably be longer than the delay due to backlog in the original journal. In this case, their recommendation will not change if you have not addressed the concerns raised in their earlier review. In: SCIENTIST INC. 3600 MARKET ST SUITE 450, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19104. //-->