Can I Withdraw a Research Paper after a Publisher Has Accepted It?

Can I Withdraw a Research Paper after a Publisher Has Accepted It?

For most researchers, the central goal of submitting a manuscript to a journal is simple: to see their work published. Acceptance from an editor is usually the end point of a long and demanding process that has involved designing a study, collecting and analysing data, drafting and revising the manuscript, and responding to peer review. It is therefore unsurprising that withdrawing a paper after it has been accepted is rare—and often surrounded by ethical concerns. Nonetheless, situations do arise in which authors begin to doubt whether publication should go ahead as planned. Understanding when withdrawal may be justified, when it is inappropriate, and how to handle the process professionally is essential for any researcher navigating the modern publishing landscape.

1. What Acceptance Really Means

Before considering withdrawal, it is important to understand what “acceptance” usually implies. When you submit a manuscript to a journal, you are effectively entering into a conditional agreement: if the journal decides, after peer review, to accept your work, you commit to publishing it there. This understanding is rarely formalised in contractual language at the point of initial submission, but it is widely recognised in academic practice.

The strength of this commitment depends partly on where your paper sits in the publication process:

• Conditional acceptance (revise and resubmit after peer review): The editor may indicate that the journal would be happy to accept the paper once specified revisions have been completed. At this stage, you are not yet formally committed. If you decide that you cannot or should not make the changes requested, you are within your rights to decline the opportunity and withdraw the manuscript.
• Formal acceptance: Once you receive an explicit acceptance letter or email—and you confirm that you wish to proceed—the mutual commitment becomes far stronger. The journal will begin the production process, assign space in an issue or an online-first queue, and invest editorial and technical resources in preparing the paper for publication.

The closer the paper is to actual publication—copy-editing completed, proofs checked, or even early online release—the more serious a withdrawal becomes. It disrupts schedules, wastes labour, and can create gaps in a planned issue. For these reasons, editors generally expect that post-acceptance withdrawal will be reserved for only the most compelling circumstances.

2. Legitimate Reasons to Consider Withdrawal

There are situations in which withdrawing an accepted paper can be both reasonable and ethically justified. They almost always involve protecting the integrity of the scholarly record or preventing harm. Some of the most common valid reasons include the following.

2.1 Discovery of Serious Errors

If you discover a major flaw in your research—such as a mis-coded dataset, a fundamental mistake in the analysis, use of incorrect instruments, or misinterpretation of core results—you may reasonably question whether the article should be published at all. A key question to ask is: Would publication, even with a correction, mislead readers or generate unreliable evidence?

Minor calculation errors, wording problems, or clarifications can normally be addressed through revision, corrigenda, or addenda. However, if the error undermines the central findings or conclusions, withdrawing the paper may be the most responsible course of action.

2.2 Ethical Concerns

Ethical issues are another strong justification for withdrawal. Examples include:

• discovering that the study did not comply fully with institutional or journal ethics requirements,
• realising that informed consent was inadequate or not properly documented,
• identifying problems in how vulnerable populations were treated or reported,
• recognising that data usage violated agreements, privacy laws, or confidentiality obligations.

These concerns should ideally have been identified and addressed long before submission. Nevertheless, ethics remain paramount. Allowing an ethically compromised paper to be published is more damaging than withdrawing it, even late in the process.

2.3 Misrepresentation or Problematic Practices by the Journal

In some cases, authors discover after acceptance that the journal does not operate as expected. Perhaps hidden or unexpectedly high publication fees are introduced late in the process, or the journal’s peer review practices turn out to be much weaker than advertised. In severe cases, the journal may be predatory—prioritising fees over quality control.

If a journal’s practices do not match the standards described on its website, or if new information reveals that the outlet would harm rather than support your scholarly reputation, withdrawal can be a justified response. In such cases, it is important to document the discrepancies and communicate them clearly and professionally to the editor.

2.4 New Evidence That Radically Alters the Picture

Occasionally, new research is published after your acceptance that significantly undermines the foundations of your study. For example, a large replication project might show that a key measure is invalid, or new data might expose serious limitations in the method you used. In many cases, such developments can be addressed by revising your discussion section or adding a note about limitations. But if the new evidence fundamentally invalidates your core claims, you may judge that withdrawal is more appropriate than publishing an outdated or misleading contribution.

The key is proportionality: the changes must be substantial enough that simple revisions do not adequately resolve the issues.

3. When Withdrawal Is Not Appropriate

Just as there are legitimate reasons to withdraw a paper, there are also scenarios in which withdrawal is inappropriate, unethical or both. These often involve prioritising personal advantage over fairness and respect for the labour of others.

3.1 Chasing a More Prestigious Journal

One of the most problematic reasons for seeking withdrawal is the desire to submit the paper to a more prestigious journal after acceptance—in particular when this was the plan all along. Sometimes authors receive positive reviewer comments that exceed their expectations and conclude that the paper might be “good enough” for a top-tier journal. Alternatively, another journal may express interest informally.

In most circumstances, withdrawing an already accepted paper so that you can pursue a more prestigious venue is considered unethical. Multiple submissions (sending the same paper to more than one journal at the same time) are already prohibited in almost all reputable outlets. Treating acceptance as a bargaining chip disrespects the editor, reviewers and journal staff who invested time in your manuscript.

3.2 Minor Revisions or Shifts in Preference

Withdrawal is also not justified when you simply disagree with relatively minor revisions suggested by reviewers, when you have changed your mind about the framing of the paper, or when you wish you had presented the work differently. Journals expect authors to refine and adjust their texts; this is part of the normal publication process. Unless the requested changes would fundamentally distort the scientific record or contradict your ethical commitments, they do not warrant full withdrawal.

3.3 Internal Author Disagreements

Disputes between co-authors—over credit, order of authorship, or interpretations—should be resolved internally wherever possible, ideally long before submission. Withdrawing a paper simply because the authors are in conflict, without any deeper ethical or scientific justification, is rarely a satisfactory solution. Most journals encourage authorship issues to be resolved at the institutional level through research integrity offices or departmental mediation, rather than through withdrawal and resubmission elsewhere.

4. Exploring Alternatives to Withdrawal

Because withdrawing an accepted manuscript is a serious step, authors should first consider whether less drastic measures can address the problem. In many cases, editors are willing to work with you to modify or contextualise the paper rather than remove it entirely.

4.1 Revision and Clarification

If your concern relates to the clarity of the argument, the framing of the discussion, or the strength of the limitations section, further revision is often the best solution. Even after acceptance, editors may allow targeted changes as long as they do not alter the fundamental nature of the accepted work.

4.2 Corrigenda, Errata and Addenda

When errors are serious enough to require public correction, but not so serious as to invalidate the entire study, journals may publish:

• corrigenda or errata to correct specific mistakes;
• addenda to extend or clarify aspects of the original publication.

These mechanisms preserve the scholarly record while ensuring that readers are alerted to necessary corrections or updates.

4.3 Retraction as a Last Resort

If problems are discovered after publication that render the paper unreliable, a formal retraction may be more appropriate than prior withdrawal. Retractions are usually reserved for serious issues such as fabricated data, plagiarism, or major methodological failures. They signal clearly to the community that the article should not be used as evidence. Retraction is often initiated by journals, but authors can and do request it when they discover serious problems.

5. How to Withdraw an Accepted Paper Professionally

If, after careful reflection, you decide that withdrawal is necessary, it is essential to proceed in a professional and transparent manner.

1. Act promptly: Contact the editor as soon as you are confident that withdrawal is justified. Delaying will only increase the disruption to the journal.
2. Explain your reasons clearly and honestly: Provide a concise yet precise explanation—whether it concerns errors, ethical issues, or journal practices. Avoid vague or defensive language.
3. Acknowledge the editor’s and reviewers’ efforts: Express appreciation for the time and care invested in your manuscript.
4. Request formal confirmation of withdrawal: Do not submit the manuscript elsewhere until you have written confirmation that it has been withdrawn from consideration and from any publication pipeline.
5. Be prepared for consequences: Some journals may charge fees for late withdrawal, and editors may be reluctant to consider future submissions from authors who have withdrawn accepted papers without compelling reasons.

A courteous, well-reasoned message demonstrates professionalism and reduces the risk of misunderstandings or reputational damage.

6. Preventing Difficult Withdrawal Decisions in Future

The best way to avoid the dilemma of withdrawing an accepted paper is to minimise the likelihood of needing to do so. Several proactive strategies can help:

• Choose journals carefully: Investigate editorial practices, fees, indexing and reputation before submission.
• Resolve authorship and framing disagreements early: Agree on authorship order, target journal, and key arguments prior to submission.
• Conduct thorough internal review: Ask colleagues to critically read the manuscript for errors, ethical concerns and methodological robustness before sending it to a journal.
• Stay updated on the literature: Perform a final literature search just before submission and again during the review process to ensure that your work is still current and appropriately contextualised.

While not every problem can be anticipated, careful preparation reduces the chances that you will later feel compelled to halt publication.

Conclusion: Balancing Integrity, Responsibility and Practical Realities

Withdrawing a research paper after acceptance is a serious decision that sits at the intersection of personal integrity, professional responsibility and the practical realities of academic publishing. It is possible to withdraw an accepted manuscript, but it should be done rarely, and only when the reasons are strong enough to justify the disruption it causes. Valid grounds typically involve protecting readers from flawed or unethical research, or responding to serious problems with the journal itself. In many other cases, revision, clarification or post-publication correction offers a better balance between honesty and continuity.

Ultimately, authors remain responsible for what they choose to publish and where they choose to publish it. Thoughtful, well-justified decisions—communicated respectfully and promptly to editors—help maintain the integrity of the scholarly record and preserve the relationships on which academic publishing depends.