Direct comparison
Reject & Resubmit vs. Revise & Resubmit
How reject-and-resubmit differs from revise-and-resubmit: new manuscript number, possible new reviewers, no guaranteed outcome, vs. the same open submission.
Written and maintained by CASRAI Editorial Board
Last updated
Ask CASRAI · free to try
Ask about Reject & Resubmit vs. Revise & Resubmit
Ask your first 2 questions free below. Subscribers get 150 a day for $29 a month.
An AI assistant specialized in research administration. It cites the sources behind every answer, labels web answers and says when it can't answer.
Answers draw on CASRAI's guides and dictionary plus the federal and funder documents we index: Federal Register, Grants.gov, Regulations.gov and UKRI.
Works on this site and inside Claude, Cursor and the AI tools you already use.
Everything CASRAI publishes — this page, the dictionary, the guides and the news — stays free to read, with no account and no card.
How do Reject and Resubmit, Revise and Resubmit (R&R) compare side by side?
The table below compares Reject and Resubmit, Revise and Resubmit (R&R) across 9 procurement-relevant dimensions, from what it formally is through how to spot it in the letter.
Side-by-side comparison
| Dimension | Reject and Resubmit | Revise and Resubmit (R&R) |
|---|---|---|
| What it formally is | A rejection decision, with an invitation to submit a reworked manuscript later | A conditional continuation of the same open submission |
| Original submission status | Closed out as a rejection | Stays open; revision logged against it |
| Manuscript number | New number assigned on resubmission | Same manuscript ID retained |
| Priority / submission date | Generally lost; resubmission gets a new date | Original submission date generally preserved |
| Reviewers on the next round | May be the same, but not guaranteed -- editor can assign new reviewers | Typically returns to the same reviewers who saw the first version |
| Signal to the author | Still formally a rejection, even if framed encouragingly | Generally a positive signal -- editor sees a plausible path to acceptance |
| Revision deadline | No formal deadline; treated as a fresh submission whenever ready | Journal typically sets an explicit revision window in the decision letter |
| Typical trigger | Changes needed are extensive enough that the editor wants to close and restart the record, even while remaining interested in the underlying work | Concerns are substantive but addressable within the existing submission |
| How to spot it in the letter | Language of "reject," "declined," or "submit as a new submission" with a new manuscript number | References the existing manuscript ID and reviewer comments without rejection language |
Common questions
Common questions about Reject and Resubmit vs Revise and Resubmit (R&R)
Is reject and resubmit the same as a rejection?
+
Yes, formally. The original submission is closed out as a rejection. The accompanying invitation to resubmit a reworked version is a separate, optional next step, not a guarantee tied to the current record.
Will I get the same reviewers if I choose to resubmit after a reject-and-resubmit decision?
+
Not guaranteed. Editors sometimes keep the original reviewers for continuity, and sometimes deliberately assign different reviewers to get a fresh read on a substantially reworked manuscript. Ask the handling editor if it matters to your planning.
Which decision is more favorable for eventually getting published?
+
Revise and resubmit is generally the more favorable signal, since the editor is keeping the existing submission open rather than closing it. A reject-and-resubmit is a genuine rejection of the current submission, even when the editor expresses interest in seeing a reworked version -- treat it accordingly rather than as a soft R&R.
How do I know which decision I actually received if the letter is ambiguous?
+
Look for whether the letter uses rejection language and whether it mentions a new manuscript number or treats the next version as a new submission. If it is still unclear, ask the handling editor directly before investing significant revision time.
