The waiting is the part nobody prepares you for. Your paper sits at a status you cannot interpret, for a length of time nobody quoted, with no obvious point at which asking becomes reasonable. Here is what the timeline usually looks like and how to read it.
How long does peer review usually take?
Between six weeks and four months for a first decision in most fields, with the median around three months. Some journals decide in three weeks; some take the better part of a year, particularly where reviewers are scarce.
| Field | Typical range |
|---|---|
| Computer science (journals) | 2–5 months |
| Engineering | 2–4 months |
| Clinical medicine | 1–3 months |
| Social sciences | 3–6 months |
| Humanities | 4–9 months |
Many journals publish their own average on the journal homepage. Where they do, believe that number over any general figure — including this table.
What does each submission status mean?
The wording varies between systems, but the sequence is broadly the same everywhere:
| Status | What is happening |
|---|---|
| Submitted / With Editor | Awaiting editorial screening. A desk rejection, if it comes, comes here. |
| Reviewers Assigned / Invited | The editor is trying to recruit reviewers. This can stall for weeks. |
| Under Review | Reviewers have accepted and are reading. The longest phase. |
| Required Reviews Completed | Reports are in; the editor is deciding. |
| Decision in Process | A decision is being written. Usually days. |
The change that most often alarms authors is a return from "Under Review" to "With Editor". It usually means one reviewer withdrew and the editor is finding another — not that something has gone wrong with your paper.
Why do reviews take so long?
Because peer review is unpaid work done by busy academics in the gaps between everything else, and editors often invite six or more people to secure two. Every declined invitation adds days.
Reviewer scarcity is worse in narrow specialisms, over the summer, and around major conference deadlines. None of it reflects on your manuscript.
When should you contact the editor?
Once the journal's own stated average has clearly passed, or after roughly three months with no status change where no average is published. One short, polite message is entirely normal and editors expect it.
Keep it to three sentences: manuscript ID, submission date, and a request for an update on expected timing. Do not ask what the reviewers said, and do not send it monthly.
Can you withdraw a paper that is taking too long?
Yes — but withdraw formally in writing and wait for confirmation before submitting anywhere else. Sending it to a second journal while the first still holds it is simultaneous submission, which every major publisher prohibits.
Withdrawal is reasonable after very long silences, but it costs you the review reports you were about to receive. Ask for a timeline first.
How can you use the waiting time?
Draft the response letter you would write to the three criticisms you already expect — you know the weakest parts of your own paper better than any reviewer will. When the reports arrive, half the work is done and the emotional impact is much smaller.
When they do arrive, how you respond matters more to the outcome than the reports themselves.
