system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
Did not receive all the reviews for a rejected article....

/rant, sorry!

Waited 4 months for peer review at a pretty prestigious journal. Got a rejection... The rejection letter said

"The Reviewers' comments on your work have now been received.  You will see that they are advising against publication of your work.  Therefore I must reject it."

&#x200B;

BUT they only provided reviewer 3's comments and they were pretty favorable. I am NOT salty about the rejection (I kind of knew it was a long shot).. but to not provide comprehensive feedback from all the reviewers is a miscarriage of the whole peer review process, IMO.

&#x200B;

Then I get a feedback form (generic) from the publisher - a survey about author services. Many strongly worded comments were made.

&#x200B;

EDIT: Yes, I have asked twice, using the 'correspondence' function in the editorial manager - with no response at all. Am thinking now I may need to go another route, maybe find an actual email address and reach out? Thoughts?
gpt
I know for a fact (Elsevier's review workshop) that the Editors are recommended to cut out very harsh reviews for obvious reasons. That could be one issue.

Another possibility is that the reviewer wrote directly to the editor pointing at a fundamental issue with the submission without referring to the authors.

It is also common that the handling editor does not wait for all reviews and rejects as soon as one of the well-trusted reviewers of the journal rejects.

The other possibility is that the editorial office mistakenly did not include all review letters because, for example, some reviewer did not fill out the online form but instead sent the review letter per Email's attachment.