Nature Neuroscience 'Under Consideration': Status Meanings and Timeline
If your Nature Neuroscience submission shows Under Consideration, here is what each status means, the timeline, and what passing the desk signals.
Research Scientist, Neuroscience & Cell Biology
Author context
Works across neuroscience and cell biology, with direct expertise in preparing manuscripts for PNAS, Nature Neuroscience, Neuron, eLife, and Nature Communications.
Next step
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Use the guide or checklist that matches this page's intent before you ask for a manuscript-level diagnostic.
Decision cue: Nature Neuroscience desk rejects 70 to 80% of submissions. If your paper shows "Under Consideration" past the 10-day mark, you have very likely survived the desk screen. The journal publishes neuroscience research that advances conceptual understanding of the brain, not just incremental observations. If you are past the desk, the editor believes your result could change how the field thinks about a neural process or system.
Check your next neuroscience submission's readiness while you wait.
Nature Neuroscience review pipeline
Status | What is happening | Typical duration |
|---|---|---|
Received | Administrative processing | 1 to 2 days |
Under Consideration | Editor evaluating, consulting team, possibly inviting reviewers | Days to weeks |
Under Review (if shown) | Sent to external reviewers | 4 to 8 weeks |
Decision in Process | Editor reviewing reports | 3 to 7 days |
Decision Made | Check email | Same day |
What Nature Neuroscience editors screen for
- Conceptual advance in neuroscience: Does this change how we think about a neural process? A new dataset or observation without conceptual insight is insufficient.
- Multi-level evidence: From molecules to circuits to behavior. The strongest papers connect across levels of analysis.
- Methodological rigor: Given the field's reproducibility concerns (see Pre-Submission Review for Neuroscience), methods and statistical approaches face heightened scrutiny.
- Sample sizes and statistical power: The median neuroimaging study has n=25, but brain-behavior associations may require thousands. Editors check whether the sample is adequate for the claims.
What happens during peer review
Papers that pass the desk screen go to 2 to 3 expert reviewers. Nature Neuroscience reviewers are selected for both their technical expertise and their ability to evaluate the conceptual significance of the work. The review evaluates:
- whether the finding changes understanding of a neural process or system
- whether the evidence is multi-level (molecular, circuit, systems, behavior)
- whether the methodology is rigorous enough for the claims
- whether the sample sizes and statistical approaches are appropriate (given the field's reproducibility concerns)
- whether the manuscript is accessible to a broad neuroscience audience
Understanding the decision
- Revise: the most common outcome for papers that pass review at Nature journals. Revisions typically require new experiments that address mechanistic questions. The revision period may be months, not weeks.
- Reject after review: the conceptual advance or evidence strength did not meet the threshold. The reviewer feedback is often detailed and constructive even in rejection.
- Redirect: the editor may suggest Nature Communications, Nature Methods, or a specialty neuroscience journal where the work has better scope fit.
When to worry, when to wait
Situation | What it likely means |
|---|---|
Under Consideration, day 5 | Editor reading or discussing |
Under Consideration, day 10+ | Likely passed desk, reviewers being invited |
Under Consideration, day 45+ | Possible reviewer delay. Follow up politely |
Decision in Process | Reports received, decision within days |
What to do while waiting
- do not submit the same paper elsewhere
- prepare for reviewer requests for additional electrophysiology, behavioral, or imaging experiments
- Nature Neuroscience revisions often require new experiments that address mechanistic questions
- check your next manuscript's readiness while you wait
Related guides
Sources
On this page
Reference library
Use the core publishing datasets alongside this guide
This article answers one part of the publishing decision. The reference library covers the recurring questions that usually come next: how selective journals are, how long review takes, and what the submission requirements look like across journals.
Dataset / reference guide
Peer Review Timelines by Journal
Reference-grade journal timeline data that authors, labs, and writing centers can cite when discussing realistic review timing.
Dataset / benchmark
Biomedical Journal Acceptance Rates
A field-organized acceptance-rate guide that works as a neutral benchmark when authors are deciding how selective to target.
Reference table
Journal Submission Specs
A high-utility submission table covering word limits, figure caps, reference limits, and formatting expectations.
Before you upload
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Move from this article into the next decision-support step. The scan works best once the journal and submission plan are clearer.
Use the scan once the manuscript and target journal are concrete enough to evaluate.
Anthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.
Where to go next
Start here
Same journal, next question
Conversion step
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Use the scan once the manuscript and target journal are concrete enough to evaluate.