How to Withdraw a Manuscript Professionally: Guidance and Sample Letters

How to Withdraw a Manuscript Professionally: Guidance and Sample Letters

Withdrawing a manuscript from a journal or publisher is a decision that every academic hopes never to face. It can feel uncomfortable, discouraging or even confrontational, especially because the scholarly publishing system relies heavily on mutual trust between authors, editors, reviewers and publishers. Yet there are legitimate circumstances in which withdrawal is not only justified, but essential for protecting your work, your professional interests and, in some cases, your academic integrity.

This extended guide provides a comprehensive overview of how, when and why to withdraw a manuscript ethically and how to communicate with editors respectfully and professionally. It also addresses the emotional and intellectual aspects of making such a decision and offers formula-based strategies for writing diplomatic and effective withdrawal letters.

1. Understanding the Ethical Weight of a Withdrawal Decision

Submitting a manuscript to a journal or press is an implicit commitment. Editors and reviewers dedicate considerable time and expertise to evaluating your work. Once peer review begins, your manuscript becomes part of a structured editorial workflow that consumes real labour and real financial resources.

Therefore, withdrawal is not a trivial act. It should be reserved for cases where:

• continuing with the process would compromise the integrity of your work,
• the publisher’s actions put your manuscript or reputation at risk,
• or unforeseen circumstances make completion or revision impossible.

In some cases, withdrawal may be ethically required—especially if you discover errors, misconduct or methodological issues that invalidate your own study. In other cases, it may be strategically advisable when reviewer comments fundamentally conflict with the central vision of your work.

2. The Five Stages of Manuscript Submission — and When Withdrawal Is Acceptable

Authors often wonder at which stage withdrawal becomes inappropriate or unethical. The answer depends on where your manuscript is in the publishing pipeline. The process can be divided into five common phases:

Stage 1 — Immediately After Submission

Withdrawal at this early moment is almost always permissible because the manuscript has not yet entered review. Reasons may include:

• accidental submission to the wrong journal,
• discovering a more suitable venue immediately afterward,
• identifying necessary revisions that cannot wait,
• spotting an error that requires immediate correction.

The editor may be inconvenienced, but withdrawal is generally uncomplicated.

Stage 2 — During Administrative Screening

Many journals perform a brief initial assessment to check formatting, relevance and completeness. Withdrawal here is still acceptable, though one should apologise for any disruption. Some journals already record the submission internally, so professionalism matters.

Stage 3 — During Peer Review

This is the most ethically sensitive stage. Most publishers consider the manuscript “in active evaluation,” and withdrawing now means the effort of reviewers has been wasted. Withdrawal at this stage is discouraged unless:

• reviewer demands require major changes that compromise your research integrity,
• serious methodological problems are discovered,
• authorship disputes arise that cannot be resolved quickly,
• you become aware of unethical behaviour from the journal,
• or a time-sensitive situation (e.g., patents or urgent data release) requires action.

Even then, the request must be diplomatic and clearly justified.

Stage 4 — After Peer Review but Before Acceptance

This is one of the most common stages for withdrawal, especially if reviewers request substantial conceptual changes that would fundamentally transform your project. You are not obligated to revise a manuscript beyond recognition. If your methodological, theoretical or structural commitments differ sharply from what reviewers demand, it may be better to withdraw and seek a more appropriate publication venue.

Stage 5 — After Acceptance or After Signing a Contract

Withdrawal at this stage is almost always discouraged and may incur:

• penalty fees,
• breach of contract claims,
• strained editor relationships,
• long-term reputational damage.

However, exceptional circumstances—such as newly discovered misconduct, legal liability or medical emergencies—may justify withdrawal. Extreme honesty and documentation are needed.

3. Assessing Your Reason for Withdrawal

Authors sometimes consider withdrawal simply because reviewer comments are disappointing or revisions appear challenging. But withdrawal should be reserved for cases that meet one or more of the following criteria:

• You cannot ethically make the requested revisions.
• The journal fails to follow its own editorial commitments.
• A collaborator becomes unable to complete their contribution.
• The journal exhibits predatory or unprofessional behaviour.
• Delay threatens grant obligations, medical responsibilities or contractual deadlines.

This section is where researchers must exercise real judgment. The question to ask is:

“Can this manuscript still become the work I want it to be under the journal’s requirements?”

If the answer is a firm “no,” withdrawal may be justified.

4. Writing a Professional Withdrawal Letter

A withdrawal request is a formal professional communication. It should:

• be concise,
• express appreciation,
• avoid emotional language,
• include a clear but brief explanation,
• remain open to dialogue where appropriate.

Avoid assigning blame or criticising reviewers openly. Even if you disagree strongly with reviewer comments, the withdrawal letter should frame the decision in professional and objective terms.

Typical structure:

Paragraph 1: Thank the editor and acknowledge their time. Paragraph 2: State the withdrawal clearly. Paragraph 3: Provide a brief reason. Paragraph 4: Offer options or next steps, if appropriate. Closing: Express appreciation again.

5. Maintaining Long-Term Professional Relationships

Academics often publish repeatedly with the same presses or journals. Editors change jobs, but editorial boards remain interconnected. A respectful withdrawal letter preserves your professional reputation and may even strengthen it by demonstrating maturity and transparency.

Editors appreciate clarity and decisiveness, and many understand that research, collaborators and circumstances evolve. The key is to withdraw politely, promptly and thoughtfully.

6. Avoiding Predatory or Unethical Journals

One of the reasons authors are forced into late-stage withdrawals is submitting unknowingly to predatory journals. Warning signs include:

• unusually fast acceptance promises,
• unclear editorial boards,
• unexpected fees requested after acceptance,
• poor-quality editing,
• inconsistent communication.

If you suspect you are dealing with such a journal, withdrawal becomes both a reputational and academic necessity.

7. Emotional Aspects of Withdrawal

Researchers often feel frustrated, embarrassed or anxious when faced with withdrawal. These reactions are normal. Remember:

Withdrawing a manuscript does not reflect failure.

It reflects:

• academic integrity,
• careful judgment,
• respect for your work,
• strategic decision-making.

What matters is how you communicate and what you learn.

8. Full Sample Letters

The following two sample letters demonstrate how to communicate a withdrawal decision respectfully and professionally under different circumstances.