Hello, this question is very hard to answers, but i think there is something wrong, if they invite to review maniscripts in their journal it's mean your research skills and competence meat the quality of the journal and consider you as an expert. But they always reject your submission it is ambiguous and not clear? contributin
Do realise that for all journals there is a difference in performing a review for a journal and getting a submitted manscript accepted.
When you submit a manuscript (in normal cases) there will be an independent proces of peer review (and before that there can be a desk rejection by the editor). Rejection occur for various reasons (not in the scope of the journal, some journals have a high rejection rate because they have high standards for 'perceived' importance and impact etc.).
It sounds indeed somewhat strange, being eligible for peer review but not 'good' enough for getting publish a paper but as said these are two separate type of processes.
If they continue to invite you to review mss., I suggest you simply ignore them. There's no need to waste your reading the ms. and writing a review, if they will simply ignore it.
This is a very interesting topic. Since this journal has rejected all your manuscripts, the editor should believe that your research level does not meet the requirements of this journal. Since that's the case, how could this journal still ask you to review their manuscripts?
In 2023, I was invited to review manuscripts for 330 different journals. Since the beginning of 2024, I have received invitations from 257 journals.
Despite my evidence-based rejections, some journals still accept manuscripts to be published with significant issues. Unfortunately, listing all the journals would be too time-consuming.
I greatly appreciate all the valuable feedback from my friends and peers. I enjoy discussing these experiences with like-minded individuals.