“Why We Say No! A Look Through the Editor’s Eye” (original) (raw)
Related papers
A Review of Reasons for Rejection of Manuscripts
Journal for Research Scholars and Professionals of English Language Teaching, 2018
Rejection of submitted Paper is normal at high profile journals. Rejection is part of academic life (Venketasubramanian, N. and Hennerici, M., 2013). Publications in the top journals are critical for career advancement and for the advancement of science. Journals are the custodians of scientific endeavor and advancement. They aim to publish sound research with enduring conclusions that will stand careful scrutiny and validation (Emad M. El-Omar, 2014). A journal is an academic or scholarly publication of research papers /articles written by researchers, professors and other experts in a specialized discipline or field of study.
Rejection of Good Manuscripts: Possible Reasons, Consequences and Solutions
Journal of Clinical Research & Bioethics, 2015
This paper describes various aspects related to manuscript rejection particularly those manuscripts proved later on to be good and explains efforts made by some biomedical journals to reduce the loss in the scientifically sound works because of rejection. Rejection of good manuscripts is a complex issue and requires initiating further discussions to encourage the emergence of new and widely applicable solutions. Studying this issue or writing about it would help beginners who seek publishing their data but face difficulties solve the problems of rejection and getting their work published in a reasonable time frame. Also, appreciating that manuscript rejection is a common occurrence would help relieving the symptoms of frustration and reduce feelings of disappointment.
Manuscript Rejection: Causes and Remedies
Journal of Young Pharmacists, 2010
Research studies performed in the field of pharmaceutical sciences are often attempted to be converted into published manuscripts. A research manuscript published in a national or international journal of repute is essentially regarded as a substantiation of reliable and dependable studies carried out by a concerned research group. Manuscripts may be published in scientific journals as research articles, reviews, short communications, commentaries, proceedings, expert opinions or editorials. The most significant and popular types among them are 'Research' and 'Review' articles, which are frequently written, read, and popularized. After the author(s) put in a lot of effort and commitment to inscribe, each manuscript, when completed, is sent to a journal for publication, where it is selected depending on the topic of the manuscript and the broad field of the journal and its scope. Before sending the manuscript, it is the duty of the author(s) to understand the scope of the journal and make sure the topic of the manuscript fulfills the journals' requirements. This will allow for avoiding unnecessary delays.
Editorial: Why was my manuscript rejected?
Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics
Over the past few years, the JACMP has received on the average over 200 proffered manuscripts per year. During this period, over 40% of these manuscripts were recommended for rejection by one of the Associate Editors. Authors receiving rejection letters are often disappointed, because they believe their work is worthy of publication-otherwise, they would not have taken the time and effort to write and submit the manuscript. Recently I reviewed a series of rejected manuscripts to determine the principal causes for rejection of a manuscript, identifying the pitfalls facing authors. By identifying the causes for rejection, I hope to encourage authors to avoid these pitfalls, and submit manuscripts that have a greater probability of acceptance. The following are the four most common reasons why a JACMP submission was recommended for rejection by an Associate Editor:
PalArch’s Journal of Archaeology of Egypt/Egyptology, 2020
This article explores factors that are crucially associated with the manuscript rejection in highly ranked and impact factor journals with special reference to the English language/literature context. Literature reviews indicate that there are numerous reasons connected to different kinds of journal in the context of specialties. In other words, the criteria of rejection or acceptance differ in science from humanities or commerce. On the other hand, other journals like in the medical field(s) have entirely different reasons for acceptance or rejection. Academic writing and language also plays a major role at least in the case of papers/manuscripts that fall under the category of English language/literature. Having a close look at different journals, it appears that sometimes it depends on the mood of the editor who reviews at initial stage before sending the article for second stage peer review for reports. The actual problem appears to be with the chief editor because the rejection is less once the article is peer reviewed or refereed. The method of the study is qualitative-analytical which relied on content analysis of the rejection letters and interviews with the editors. Results will facilitate publications aspirants to develop an insight into rejection of papers in general and English language and literature in particular.
Manuscript Submission and Evaluation: Journal Characterization and Editors' Perception
Scientific journals have a great geographic reach and are used for reporting research, intended to the progress of science. As well as the research, the quality and reliability of journals should be also considered. The scientific community follows guidelines, codes of conduct in research and best practices to support its activities. Since the level of demand of quality scientific journals is constantly increasing, the editor plays a fundamental role in this scenario. Thus, this work will show the importance of the editor's management for the quality of the journal.
Reasons Reviewers Reject and Accept Manuscripts
Academic Medicine, 2001
Purpose. Scientific journals rely on peer review to maintain the high quality and standards of papers accepted for publication. The purpose of this study was to explore the strengths and weaknesses of medical education reports by analyzing the ratings and written comments given by external reviewers. Method. The author conducted a content analysis of reviewers' comments on 151 research manuscripts submitted to the 1997 and 1998 Research in Medical Education conference proceedings. The negative comments on 123 manuscripts that received ''questionable, probably exclude'' or ''definitely exclude'' overall ratings from at least one reviewer were evaluated. A similar analysis was performed on reviewers' positive comments for 28 manuscripts recommended unanimously for acceptance. Results. On average, four peers (4.1, SD = 0.97, range = 2-6) reviewed each manuscript. Of those recommended for exclusion, a mean of 2.3 reviewers recommended exclusion and each reviewer wrote a mean of 8.1 (SD = 5.7) reasons. The top ten reasons for rejection were: inappropriate or incomplete statistics; overinterpretation of results; inappropriate or suboptimal instrumentation; sample too small or biased; text difficult to follow; insufficient problem statement; inaccurate or inconsistent data reported; incomplete, inaccurate, or outdated review of the literature; insufficient data presented; and defective tables or figures. The main strengths noted in accepted manuscripts were the importance or timeliness of the problem studied, excellence of writing, and soundness of study design. Conclusion. While overstating the results and applying the wrong statistics can be fixed, other problems that the reviewers identified (ignoring the literature, designing poor studies, choosing inappropriate instruments, and writing poor manuscripts) are likely to be fatal flaws warranting rejection.