I sent him email and said deal with it.

Is your advisor a coauthor of the paper? If he or she is, and he or she was not aware of the double submission then something went wrong well before the submissions.

He is coauthor but he thought I might have submitted an extended version. And by the way he overlooked the emails recieved during submission process or he trusted me.

@Kumar Then it's their fault too: as a coauthor, your advisor should have approved the final submission (by actually reading or, at least, going through it). If you didn't send your advisor a copy of the submitted paper, they should have asked for it. As I said, something went wrong before the double submission.

@massimo yes I understand that but right now I as a corresponding and handling author the pressure is on me.

Since most journals have you state you are submitting only to them, then you lied to both journals. Why?

what action has the reviewer for j2 actually taken? he contacted you directly? if so, what action did he plan to take? what course of action did he recommend for you?

-1 because the best way to show you are NOT sorry for your mistake is to be asking here about what you can do to maximizes the chances that your article will be published.

"Should I write apology email to j2?" Seriously? You don't know the answer to this question? Hint: it's the same as the answer to "Should I write an apology to j1?" and "Should I write an apology to my co-author(s)?"

You are pretty much screwed here on both of the journals. This is exactly the reason why you should always submit your articles to at least three journals.

@MassimoOrtolano I don't think any co-authors necessarily merit blame. At least in my field, it's not expected that each author review the submission process.

So you're asking to help you come up with a way out while you willingly and knowingly tried to cheat the system?

I don't believe for one minute this was a "mistake". This was a deliberate act of trying to "game the system". You are upset - not because of your deeds - but because of being caught. You are trying to deceive the people here trying to help you by acting "contrite" and " remorseful". Oh, PLEASE. Just admit you tried to game the system, apologize, and move on. Hopefully, this lack of judgement and character won't damage your career too much.

The more you're cruel to OP, the better academician they will be. Does anyone else has any comments to keep on embarrassing the OP?

I have personally never heard of anyone submitting to ONLY one journal, but it may be a field-specific thing? I don't think you did anything wrong, regardless. If it was just a note, it was just a note.

@WeckarE. As far as I know, there is only one field in which submitting to multiple journals is considered alright (law). There might be a few others, but in most fields the author guidelines explicitly forbids it. So yes, they did do something wrong.

@WeckarE. yes, I am one of those who only submit to one journal at a time. Nice to meet you! In my field, it is expressly and justifiably frowned upon.

@WeckarE, in your field are you allowed to submit the same article to multiple journals in parallel? In in parallel part is the key here.

@mikeazo We are encouraged to do so, as many journals only see readership with specific nationalities or interest sub-fields.

Of course, the OP has deliberately tried to break the rules, but I don't understand why he should feel bad about it or why this is morally wrong. Nevertheless, I guess it is the best tactic to apologize.

@PMF I think you may be interpreting the word “mistake” differently from the OP. The question’s “I made a mistake and committed academic misconduct” simply means “I did something wrong: I committed…”: in a sense that includes deliberate (known to be wrong) acts. Looking at dictionary definitions for “mistake”, I see both definitions that fit (“an action or judgment that is misguided or wrong”, “…caused by bad judgment or a disregard of rule or principle”) and those that don't (“…caused by poor reasoning, carelessness, insufficient knowledge, etc”, “a misunderstanding or misconception”).

@ShreevatsaR Completely agree. And the "committed academic misconduct" supports the first definition. A genuine mistake wouldn't be misconduct.

Forgive my naïvety, but what is so bad about parallel submission? It seems like this taboo only exists to serve the publication's interest.

@JoelCornett because it means that the entire publication process will become increasingly chaotic: No journal would be able to know, if after a long review process and then accepting a paper for publication, the author will suddenly pull the paper because he got it published in a "better" journal.

Not that it will help you now, but you should have planned and designed the papers to differ by at least as much as to have plausible deniability in saying it is not the same paper.

@PMF: You are expected to assume good faith on this network. Your "telling off" comment ought to be removed at the first opportunity.

Plausible deniability, @mathreadler? For shame. Google "least publishable unit"....

@FredDouglis: yes I agree, that was really bad wording, a much better explanation is down on my answer with discussion in comments.

@mathreadler your answer makes the same point. You're still proposing unethical behavior. As a program chair, we rejected two papers that followed exactly your model. Same content, different words, still duplicates.

@FredDouglis: Unethical behavior? What for? You often need to reach different audiences and in doing so you need to adapt to speak their language to reach them. Could well be that a reader of journal 2 could get a super good idea from reading your paper but would never even read from journal 1.

@mathreadler just because you explain something differently doesn't move it beyond an LPU.

@FredDouglis: I don't know what this LPU is and it won't help me get my golf balls arriving either. I was merely discussing what would be good for the dissemination of information for the sake of science.

Read my answer to which you replied earlier. Least Publishable Unit. It's a derogatory term.

Derogatory depends on frame of reference. I'm still not getting my damn golden golf balls from over the *!¤% pond! Where are they?!