Simultaneous Submission: Can You Submit the Same Paper to Multiple Venues?
Submitting the same paper to two journals at once, hoping to take whichever accepts first, feels like an efficient way to shorten the long review timeline. It’s also one of the more clearly prohibited practices in academic publishing, and getting caught carries real consequences, understanding both why this rule exists and what the legitimate alternatives are helps researchers navigate long review timelines without risking their professional standing.
Why the prohibition exists
Peer review is volunteer labor, and simultaneous submission means two sets of reviewers may spend real time evaluating a paper that only one venue will ultimately publish. Most journals and conferences state this explicitly in their submission policies, and violating it is treated as a serious ethics breach, not a technicality, reflecting the genuine cost imposed on the broader review system.
What actually counts as a violation
Submitting an identical or substantially similar manuscript to more than one journal at the same time is the clear case. A withdrawn submission, formally retracted before being sent elsewhere, is generally fine, the issue is concurrent, not sequential, submission.
Where it gets genuinely more nuanced
Conference-to-journal publication of an extended version, done transparently and per the target journal’s stated policy, is a well-established and accepted practice, not the same thing as simultaneous submission, since the conference and journal versions differ substantially and the practice is expected in many fields. The key difference is transparency: disclosing the earlier version rather than presenting it as fully new work.
The consequences of violating this norm can be significant
Beyond immediate rejection from both venues if discovered, simultaneous submission can result in formal reporting to your institution, damage to your professional reputation within your field’s community, and in serious or repeated cases, more formal sanctions from publishers or professional societies, worth taking this norm seriously rather than treating it as a minor administrative rule.
What to do if you’re facing a genuinely long review wait
Politely requesting a status update from the editor after a reasonable period, or formally withdrawing before submitting elsewhere, are the accepted ways to manage a slow review process. If a decision genuinely feels overdue, some venues have a stated escalation path through an editorial office, using that is a better route than submitting elsewhere without withdrawing first.
Consider preprints as a legitimate way to increase visibility during a long review
Posting a preprint, discussed in more depth in our guide on preprints and whether you should post one, provides some of the speed and visibility benefits researchers seek from simultaneous submission, without violating the single-venue review norm.
A checklist for managing long review timelines appropriately
- Never submit the same paper concurrently to more than one venue
- Withdraw formally before submitting elsewhere if a decision is taken to change venue
- Use polite, professional status inquiries rather than assuming the worst about delays
- Consider a preprint as a legitimate alternative for increasing visibility during review
Frequently asked questions
How long should I wait before inquiring about a delayed decision?
This varies by journal and field, but checking the journal’s stated typical timeline and waiting a reasonable period beyond it, often a few weeks to a month past the expected date, before a polite inquiry is standard practice.
Is it acceptable to submit a paper to one journal while a related but distinct paper is under review elsewhere?
Yes, provided the papers are genuinely distinct works, not overlapping submissions of the same core content or results.
What happens if a journal discovers simultaneous submission after acceptance?
This can result in retraction, formal institutional reporting, and lasting reputational damage, a serious consequence worth avoiding entirely by following proper withdrawal procedures instead.