The Philosophers' Cocoon

A safe and supportive forum for philosophers.

Owned & Moderated by Marcus Arvan (University of Tampa)

Contact: marvan@ut.edu

Blog mission & moderation policy

IMPORTANT NOTE on how to ensure anonymity in commenting
Job-Market Reporting Thread (2025-26)
Job-Market Discussion Thread (2025-26)

recent posts

about

Thanking reviewers at journals that rejected your paper?

In our June “how can we help you?” thread, a reader asks:

What’s the etiquette around acknowledging helpful input on a paper from reviewers at a journal where the paper was rejected? E.g. Reviewer 1 at Journal A gives helpful feedback, but Journal A rejects the paper. Paper ends up published in Journal B; how should one acknowledge Reviewer 1’s help, if at all? I have seen acknowledgements that named the other journal explicitly, but this struck me as a bit awkward in terms of revealing prior rejections. (Which we all know happen but might still be a bit awkward to publicize.)

Thoughts from readers?

Posted in

6 responses to “Thanking reviewers at journals that rejected your paper?”

  1. Corvus splendens

    I’d be inclined to just thank “n₁ anonymous reviewers”, perhaps “including n₂ at this [the publishing] journal”, at most.

    I don’t have a great sense of settled norms on this but I’d certainly not be put out if a paper I’ve previously reviewed elsewhere comes out and doesn’t have any acknowledgment.

    Reply
  2. Anonymous

    Maybe an odd strategy, but can you email the editor of Journal A and thank them for their help, note how useful the feedback of reviewer 1 was, and ask them to relay your gratitude in an email to reviewer 1? As a reviewer, I’d be absolutely thrilled about getting such an email, whereas I’m unlikely to stumble across the acknowledgment in the paper, or realize that the shoutout is to me as opposed to other reviewers. And this way, the editor also gets some happy news about their ability to select quality reviewers!

    Reply
  3. Anonymous

    I’ve seen a paper give thanks to a reviewer at another journal. In this case, the other journal was noticeably more prestigious than where the paper eventually got published. This felt a little odd to me, as if (perhaps unintentionally) the author wanted to signal that their paper was (apparently favorably) reviewed in a top-5 place. Maybe that response by me was irrational. But either way, it seems that the the logistics of conveying gratitude across journal lines is sufficiently complicated that I’d probably not try it, unless maybe in the general terms that Corvus suggests.

    Reply
  4. Anonymous

    I’ve thanked reviewers at specific journals that have rejected my paper. But I’ve only done it when I was really impressed with the feedback I got, and wanted the reviewers to know that, despite the rejection, I thought they were helpful. Otherwise, I just thank the reviewers at the journal where it is accepted.

    Reply
  5. Michel

    Just thank reviewers collectively, or specify the number of them. No need to indicate the journals.

    Reply
    1. Anonymous

      Agreed

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Discover more from The Philosophers' Cocoon

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading