My mentor taught me to never give up on a manuscript. In fact, it took us 15 years to publish one study, due to its controversial topic. When we finally saw it in print, after far too many rejections to even recount, it gave us a sense of accomplishment. Truthfully, the paper that ultimately saw the light of day was the very best version we had written. Together, my mentor and I published many studies together, in part, because we never gave up on any good ideas. Based on that experience and many others like it, I've taught my students to do the same.

But I understand the thrust of the question. No doubt, there are countless publishable projects that lie fallow simply because authors have become discouraged. Conversely, there are those who never fully appreciate the process in another sense. I refer to writers who keep submitting fatally flawed papers time and again until some editor takes pity on them (or has unfilled journal pages). What a shame. All that effort with so little to show for it, except frustration.

One answer to your question is that highly productive scholars continue to revise and resubmit their work until it becomes good enough for publication. Many less productive writers simply give up on manuscripts after comparatively mild critique. Last, there are those who can't seem to give up on their fatally flawed studies or ideas.

Roger me!

Yes, unfortunately

Yes I do

My great pleasure

I do have more than 3, never submitted nor rejected, just "postponed".

I over edit myself for fear of failure. David Krashen calls 'monitoring'!

Could you describe the subject? Perhaps you have space at the university

This is a very sensitive but very very relevant topic to be asked and answerd by a scientists.

I have more than 20 papers, some in the que for publication, others because they were not accepted by the journals in three attempt, still others which are in the process of writing, some still which could not be written properly and could not satisfy me and are held up for rewriting, there are some for which a decision on the journal could not be taken because they deserve a higher impact journal.

Now the question for publisheing these papers lying pending with a scientist is to create a balance between

1. Time available for writing the paper

2. Selection of a proper impact factor journal

3. communicating and facing the acceptance or rejection of the paper

4. Availability of the finances to pay for the publication charges

5. Obtaining of the permission for publication from the competent authority

and many other factors like this

So these papers are pending

I have 3 papers need to be submitted!! I always say next week but it never comes since last three years, perhaps due to my PhD studies,, Those are from my MPhil work..

I submitted some for publication in the review process but there are some left. I want to revise first and publish the remaining later.

Once your publication is rejected nobody isthere to help you out

regarding the rectifications and correctons. There should be some

experts to give you proper guidence of you publication

Scientific reasoning is cordial and reliable to the researcher. Rejection of certain results does not mean that you are a dump and unscientific. Always try your lack elsewhere!

Historically speaking, they might go quite far in pushing their papers to be published. Simply think of falsified findings in scientific papers during the soviet era like the one based on 'tempering' seeds in cold water so that wheat could grow in the fall and spring. This lead to the ukraine famine and killed over 6 million people. All because an authoritarian government enforced the falsified findings of a paper as public policy.

Publishable ideas are always a sense to the owner (scientist). However, when psychology relates in the opposite direction, scientists do not stop being what they have claimed to be. Even "small" journals have a taste for bigger scientific interventions. Those results may look mediocre yet someone somewhere thirsts for them. Let us not give up this academic evaluations. It is formative today, the next day it grows larger to summative. We have different scientific/empirical tests and my taste may not be tested with "our" instruments.

Hello,

my first article to be published was rejected twice for different reasons a.o. "it is not a topic of our interest".. Then I first send an abstract to the Chief Editor of a suitable paper and asked if they were interested. Once I had my first article published, the next was easier. But still I have 3 articles filed, that need some revision before I will submit them. I think, every scientist has some of these in his computer. Maybe some have some, because they only want to publish in top ranked journals. I know, that such journals only publish about 2% of the articles submitted by researchers.

Every researcher has papers that have been rejected. The odds are against us! (Actually, journals have to report rejections to maintain their quality). The following are the possible outcomes: 1. Submit to a more fitting journal. 2. Revise with feedback from the referees and resubmit, possibly elsewhere. 3. Salvage a part for another paper. 4. Rewrite completely (often the best option!) 5. Submit it to a conference instead. 6. Let it languish in the dark recesses of a hard-drive, in case that topic becomes "hot" again. 7. Use it for lecture notes and see what the students do not understand, so that can be fixed! 8. Bury it, and regard it as experience.

Hello all , this is a important discussion in " academic world" and for all people education sector and others .... Is true , not easy sometime to publish a article in some magazine and some time, is easy to publish it about in other .....but what we "have our hands " is to try and to try again and again if we have good and strong arguments that this article can do some good impact and can do a good change in academic research or one of community is asking for those idea ...any way I think we must have all time strong willing , to cooperate with others ,to keep standard any time, and to asking for support for published not only our country bout where and around the world.....

Sometimes it is a matter of finding the right journal for the topic.

Yes Amy ,Thanks , you are wright is important what journal is ,,,,and more others reasons ...

Nobody likes to have his manuscripts rejected, however, it is a natural part of the peer review process and it works very well. Anyone who claims being a scientist and has his manuscript rejected should be able to apply his scientific methodology to learn from that experience, search for the causes, reorganize the paper and resubmit it. In research we never get the expected result with the first experiment, but it takes many trials that are reflected in months and years of work. So, you should not feel frustrated after getting your paper rejected a few times; you should keep improving it and retrying as many times as necessary, but… please no cheating. If you feel discouraged by a few rejections, you should see what literature writers have to endure before getting their manuscripts accepted, they are commonly rejected between 50 to 100 times.

I know of PIs that sit on papers and send them out when they are having a research "dry spell" to make it look like they are producing. (ie paper written in 2007, sent out in 2011 with no changes

)

I think that they are many justifiedreasons but others not. The journals are more monodisciplinary and corporative. The proper scientific production is more specialized . When the publishers do not find a clear correlation of an article with the target of the journal this are refused, other times have an intolerância front the contrary opinions. I think that the scientific produtivismo is neglecting of the quality of the contents. Also the predominance of the interest for quantitative research and disdain for qualitative studies. I believe that it is necessary greater transparency in the evaluations of articles, and also to create plural criteria for publication.

yes, I have at least ten unpublished papers. The reason are varied: time, incomplete research data, I lost interest in the topic, it is not organized, it is in the wrong format and more. The is also a secret side of me that thinks "this is good work, and you are trying to get the most important part cut out for word length" I am also finishing a doctorate and need to focus on that for now.

All that words are good ,

I have one comment from the reviewer in one famous and have high impact factor. that the tool she or he did hear about it and actually the tool was famous for people in me field.

Now what is the recommendation to us for publishing

Usually I tried with one magazine and another when my work is rejected. Most of the time the line is: your article don't match with the kind of papres we publish. But there was one, that with that line I recieved a very offensive comment, it was a spniash magazine they add a note: your ides are out of mind. It was an article about the process of learning. I was really upset, so I published in my personal blog. So far is the most popular article of my blog. I believe people apprecite it even more because is free access...

In my opinion, besides being accepted or rejected, to wait for an answer is the worst thing when you submit a paper.

I am wondering why it takes too long ( 5-6 months) to evaluate a paper?

I wonder the same Merve!. We send our work, for free. Why do they make us suffer so much? and then, they say yes, and even with a yes, we must wait another 6 months, and if they say no, we humble say: thanks...

Yeah, I have one incomplete and one unpublished paper in my Laptop.

The main intention/objective of the researcher isto share the ideas and to know the strengths and weakness with others. Publishing in the journal is one of the platform. if the paper rejected share with colleagues about the cause or carry forward the suggestions made by the Editor. But before sending the paper the researcher has to made SWOT analysis by himself. Once rejected and kept aside is not advisable for the researcher. Search...Research... and reach the goal is main motive of contributor. out of my 80 papers published some are rejected but again i worked on it and got it published in the journal. Work and fight till the goal is reached. Suggestion for young Research

I have around ten unpublished papers. The reason is lack of time for editting them to meet the reqirements of the journals I like to send the papers to.

If you want to see about getting all of these papers published, check out www.scienceworksmagazine.com. It's not a "proper" journal (whatever that means) in that it is more commentary and review, but totally has its own editorial board that has in place all the processes you would expect from any peer-reviewed journal, and is run by a group of scientists who are ticked off with the "prestigious" journals.

Plus the people there are looking at setting up www.scienceworksjournal.com which will be primary science only.

And there is a function for citations being developed, both to and from.

Have a look. They might just take your papers.

Some time creative idea was blocked by the format of the paper to publish. Some time what we wanted to tell, could not go out...we have to go any way...Keep going on...one day some one may understand our idea..

Our scientific models have ideas that we shall never regret their production/generation/construction. However ideological and scientific our papers may express, few eyes have the " taste" of our presentation. A brief read of the abstract tastes like hot pepper, the likes of "not my field" and "nothing new is presented". May be the locale where the study took place is seen as the only new idea in your paper. I like telling my students that they have to stand strong whenever they have the idea they call their. Does not matter who publishes it or rejects it, but let it be scientific all through. Other editors/reviewers will see more than they can comprehend and raise the alert of " The ANOVAs for the technology ratings, number of positive descriptors, and number of negative descriptors all showed significant effects." So what is not scientific here? Professors have a word of caution to the likes of "My paper might not even go through the first tie"

Select a journal, Prepare the manuscript, decide authorship, submit the manuscript, do not let criticism get you down. And the process continues being scientific as it will always be and wanting to publish your scientific ideas continues to create more anxiety, and less joy. You are not the first one to have the final comments from this editor "Look for another channel to publish your work" and there is always such channels and avenues. Get your papers published!

My mentor taught me to never give up on a manuscript. In fact, it took us 15 years to publish one study, due to its controversial topic. When we finally saw it in print, after far too many rejections to even recount, it gave us a sense of accomplishment. Truthfully, the paper that ultimately saw the light of day was the very best version we had written. Together, my mentor and I published many studies together, in part, because we never gave up on any good ideas. Based on that experience and many others like it, I've taught my students to do the same.

But I understand the thrust of the question. No doubt, there are countless publishable projects that lie fallow simply because authors have become discouraged. Conversely, there are those who never fully appreciate the process in another sense. I refer to writers who keep submitting fatally flawed papers time and again until some editor takes pity on them (or has unfilled journal pages). What a shame. All that effort with so little to show for it, except frustration.

One answer to your question is that highly productive scholars continue to revise and resubmit their work until it becomes good enough for publication. Many less productive writers simply give up on manuscripts after comparatively mild critique. Last, there are those who can't seem to give up on their fatally flawed studies or ideas.

I like the comment of chris sawyer. Real aptitude of the researcher

Very instructive comments...from all difference point of view: THANK YOU ALL.

In these last 3 years I was little surprised how a peer-review system could work...specially having had a role a reviewer for some papers.

Sometimes papers are rejected because the English or the wording is not appropriate. Of course you can catch up all this, but however surprised how many of us let this papers sleep in our file -like Servat said.

Therefore my question of the above. My next question is: Would these scientists be ready to publish their "unpublished" on a site just for the purpose to SHARE science information?

To answer this question I decided to launch a site The Unpublished Articles in Science in few days... and let you all know about it¨

Hello Me too I sincerely like the comment of chris. Never give up !. it s not really easy to be published in impacted peer-reviewed journals. Every researcher can have good ideas which are not necessarily accepted by reviewers for several reasons. Nevertheless, we should be able to accept, learn more, try again and be critic with ourselves In developping countries, we have no equal means and no equal opportunities comparing with developped countries. lack of means is one of the limiting factors for publications. But...... Once we are accepted it 's a satisfaction because we have conveyed an additional scientific message.

Hello it s a "way to publish the unpublished papers" why not with a more opened discussion. Thanks

Discussion is a key point of Unais (Unpublished Articles In Science)

Authors can post their unpublished papers.

if rejected they can also upload peer-review document

paper will be classified in the respective science field

when you will read someone else paper you can comment

students (and the other) will be able to use "articles and comment" as a tool for a learning process (how to write a scientific paper)

Reading from unpublished papers peers might authors will share their knowledge

new team contact can get in touch and work together

The only point is that the author who will post his paper on Unais will not get ANY impact factor, but will definitely contribute to SHARE knowledge ...which is the first way to empower to human kind (:->)

I have a paper published, because the reviewer says the English is poor. I will never give it up. I am trying to publish it！

Your are right, Xu: don't give up! You can also find help for the writing/publication process from some well established organization (we regularly receive some advertisement in our e-mail box)

The only purpose of Unais is to "share" those unpublished/rejected papers that anyhow would remain hidden from the community in our computer files.

Wish you the best for your paper!

Regards,

AD

we cant put the fail on the journals! we have to get the best to place it on the best journal pages, see to it that your paper is worth for a good impact factor! if it isnt, then try to send it for lesser impacts! and yeah starters will find it difficult, and you should learn or will learn once you are in line, practice and xp makes everything perfect, but bare in mind that, only WHAT YOU PRACTICE, YOU WIL GET DONE! once you change the nature and quality of the subject and the paper, again you should practice from first!

Dear All,

Unais (Unpublished Articles in Science) was launched some hours ago.

So scientist who author of a rejected/unpublished article that will never be submitted are invited to post their parker on Unais just for sharing the information.

Like any new brand new site do not hesitate to come back with any suggestion.

www.unais.net

Regards,

AD

Many thanks Alessandro Diana. UNAIS is a rescue to would be a "reject" in the field of publishing. Thou not loaded with content, the page looks quite attractive. We hope that participation of members could boost its purpose and eventually develop to an International Journal of Scientific Research. This is just but a dream but who knows the future of a potential element!

Interesting and new media from unais. Sometimes reviewers' comments are very useful. I can learn from the comments and do self assessment for improving the quality of the manuscript.

Thank you Afifah! Now UNAIS is www.unais.net with its first publication!

Regards

Says:-

My paper was rejected 5 times before it got the green flag (accepted for review). No matter, even if mine gets rejected 100 times I shall still try the 101th time. It all depends on what you are trying to convey to the society through your research work. I feel that, shelving an unpublished paper is foolish. At least such papers can serve as an example for the next generation on 'how not to write a paper'.

@Sai: Thank you for input! You are right: never give up to publish your paper in a peer-review. NEVER!

UNAIS'scope is not to be an alternative for peer-review journal!

It's more a scientific basket where authors can share their unpublished...that will never be resubmitted! (please have a look in the attached file)

Obviuosly papers posted on UNAIS represents " recyclable" scientific contains that may be used for students as you said..as well for the all scientific community to pick up, share, shape and work an idea...

Kindest regards

Article How to Manage Rejected Scientific Papers? UNAIS as Final Solution

Yes i experienced rejections twice

Alessandro, I am not convinced with that concept. My main concern is about the inappropriate use that inexperienced people could make of the submitted information . If the information has not been accepted for publication, it means that there are some unresolved issues that might not be evident to everyone and that could mislead students or inexpert researchers. Even worse, if it is intended for “recycling”, does it mean that anyone can take it, modify it and publish it?

I hope you have thought of these and other possible issues. How are you dealing with that?

@Martin: many thanks for your input. You brought milestones issues here!

UNAIS is on with its first unpublished (www.unais.net) and needs inputs like yours!

UNAiS concept is to share and post un unpublished paper. Authors are invited to post also the peer review refusal.

This is not a validation. This is only transparency of what people do and why their paper are unpublished!

You certainly know that some (or lots!) paper are refused just because of the style, the language. BUT CONTENT is there! Well this is information to share!

This content it is useful for students and inexpert researches: They can have access to papers who were not been published for xyz! VIVA Teaching by case!

I have already had been contact by 2 Deans (University) to give access to students.

Nevertheless and Of COURSE I will encourage authors to find a way to publish their papers!

But my interest here with UNAIS goes to those papers who are anyhow vegetating in a computer and will never be resubmitted!

I have asked around: it is amazing how many papers are unpublished just because the authors gave up!

Please read my testimonies on the BioImpact's article (you will find the full text here on the site on my Publication! As a reviewer I was surprised for some articles to be

unpublished....and published!

So again UNAIS concept is not to be another Journal, but a repository where simply authors wants to share their unpublished paper.

Once you post your publication anyone can pick up your idea! This is all about SCIENCE: you have an hypothesis, you conduct a study. OTHERS HAVE TO REPRODUCE IT!

Of course if your study leads to a "business issue" and/or to an intellectual property you have to protect it with a copyright! But nobody is "owner" of the concept of his study....

The only issue is: once you publish your study you should not published as it is to another journal.

So if an author post a paper on UNAIS and thanks to collegues'comments he gets to finalize his study he can publish it...because then it will be "another paper"!

I obviously thought about this issues and give these answers thanks to a lawyer, specialist on publication domains (.-)

An Editorial Board will of course select papers posted on UNAIS to prevent- as you said- to prevent that a crazy guy would publish a non plausible scientific article... This a real plausible possibility.

Nowadays we are 2 people on the Editorial Board! So anybody who would be interested to join the team we are waiting for you!

Again thank you a lot

Sincerely,

Alessandro

@Pooja: thanks for sharing your experience. May I ask you what are you going to do with your 2 rejected papers!

Of course I will suggest you first to work on it in the way that reviewers suggested to you.

other than that for "the proof of concept". If you should leave this papers in your USB stick for the Eternity, would you be willing to consider to post on Unais?

Regards,

Alessandro

As I write this note, I have just received a rejected paper that had taken one full year with a journal. Yesterday I submitted to another journal which indicated read something like this " We have checked your paper with iThenticate and found that the Similarity Index of your paper is 35 percent.If you would like to publish this article, please make a thorough revision to keep the index under 15 percent and re-submit". This is a common stress but I am determined to have it published. I feel the findings it displays must get published no matter what and how long it takes. One scientist tells me that to have a paper rejected is fun!

Says:-

@ Lazarus Ndiku Makewa - I understand your current situation better Sir. I received similar replies for my paper. But fortunately for me I always got clearance regarding the plagiarism issue. Yes, iThenticate is one of the leading anti-plagiarism software's available today. I suggest you to check your paper on this regards before you submit it elsewhere. As far the reply you got from the reviewer's side, it is always good to get the mistakes pointed out. I can compare it to a film director getting screwed by the censor board regarding the film he/she made. It all depends on how we reciprocate and proceed further. And finally it is definitely a fun to get our paper rejected. One of the straight forward reply I once got was "Sorry, your manuscript does not suit our journal requirements". Though I accepted this reply in a positive way, not only me, but I believe, all the researchers would first of all read about the journal requirements, then alter our paper accordingly, and then only submit it for consideration. But yes, it is really fun, because unless our paper gets rejected, only then we can start to think it in a different angle and make few (legal) modifications and then try out in any other relevant journal.

One beautiful sentence always strikes my mind --> "Only when our life is on the line, we'll know more about ourselves".

@ Lazarus: It will be more fun when your paper will be accepted! But i agree, even the "rejected part" could be fun, specially if refusal's reasons are pertinent and you can go forward/polish your paper!

What a pity that you had to wait 1 year from the Journal to say that your paper is rejected!!!!

I cross fingers for a forthcoming -and faster!- publication of your paper!

@Sai: Beautiful sentence, I will cite it: thank you! Do you know who said it? Maybe a buddhist saying...

Last year I also received a rejected paper with the sentence "Sorry, your manuscript does not suit our journal requirements...+ a report of a reviewer who did not get the study concept". That was so strange...because for the first time I had a clear feeling that the reviewer was not an expert.

Anyways, long story short, after having contact the Editor by phone- he realized right away how wrong was the Journal response, and begged thousand of apologies. Editor wanted this study in his Journal and he went published right away.

Officially I understood that this was a "bad choice" of the reviewer who did not know so much on the subject.

Later on I discovered that the reviewer was an expert in the field - obviously!- and had some competing conflict of interest with the study...

I am deeply convinced that we need more transparency on the reviewer process! We definitely urge international guideline!

Who is a reviewer? A friend' Editor?

Which requirements to be eligible ?

How regulate obvious competing conflicts of interest when an expert is reviewing a peer paper?

How far do you reject a paper because of its presentation (language, appropriate wording,...) but with scientific content?

How far Journal MUST have a look in the database?

How come no Journal ask for the database?

Many other questions in my list....

Looking forward to hear from you (:-)

a have had 2 papers being rejected so far. the reason being was that the scope of the journal did not allow them to have my paper accepted. Then, I forwarded these rejected papers, and both are now published.... Yet, i have around 5 works, which are being prepared to be published in near future. for some, the data is collected, and for some the data analysis is also accomplished. Nonetheless, they have not been sent to see if they are rejected.

I believe a rejected paper might entail some methodology or statistical serious problems, other wise, the style and format can be improved to be published after getting rejected. My regards; Reza

Says:-

@Alessandro Diana - To start with, thank you. That sentence I have quoted is a dialogue from a movie (forgot it's name). Sorry, I just remembered what was essential there. Similarly, reviewers also look out for what is essential and they support those key aspects alone. My opinion is, transparency in the review process is not essential at all. The reviewers are not common laymen. They are definitely experienced professionals in their respective fields and they know their game. I am confidently saying this because I have had first hand experience in the review process. Though I am not a reviewer (now), I was fortunate to assist a few of my teachers in their review processes.

Coming to the conflict of interest, I would say, it depends on the situation, the content and quality of the paper. In my view, no reviewer will reject any paper only for the sake of rejecting. I am sorry, I don't understand which database you actually meant.

@Sai: for database= collection of yours results/patients/... i.e for a clinical study.

I am deeply convinced that Editor should have a look in the database of each paper he's willing to publish.

This should be part of a publishing procedure!

No doubt that your reviewer-teacher are excellent, and that most of the cases they are. Fortunately I have also plenty of such good examples!

But this is not the point I wanted to bring it out.

In any " good system" you need guidelines. They must be documented, accepted, open, accessible, clear and traceable. That's what I meant with TRANSPARENCY. Nothing to worry to show up that a "good" reviewer is a good one and has all the required " credentials"

Unfortunately I have several reported example that conflict of interest IS AN ISSUE, A BIG ONE ISSUE...than only

TRANSPARENCY could fight...or at least regulate!

Regards +++

@Reza: Thank you. I agree with you: no reviewer would rejected a paper for the sake of it!

I can list reasons for refusal:

1) according to her/his expertise = paper was not good for publication

2) misunderstanding the study. Minimum dual reviewer procedure prevents this point (.-)

3) conflict of publication

4)....

Would be interesting to design a study! A questionnaire- study addressed to a bunch of reviewer. But who they are? where to find them?

Have a great day

Rejection is always a part of review process. One should learn why the work or manuscript is rejected and modify accordingly. It is essenntial to know the standard of your work and accordingly choose the right journal for submission. If atall it is rejected than go for the other journal after correction. This is a learning process. As a researcher everyone has to face the rejction as well as encourgment.

Rejection of manuscript always leads to dejection. It's a part and parcel of academic endeavor. The point that is of interest to understand is the reason for rejection. Is it because the findings are not too clear or journal does not agree with the viewpoints of the author or research design is unacceptable. It seems to me that a combination of objective as well as subjective factors may contribute towards manuscript being rejected.

@ Trilochan & Madhavilatha: Thank you for your input. I totally agree. I hope you did get my point, which is from the other side of the researcher/author. After having send paper there is another world! I hope this part of the world could be one day -it will be!-dealt with transparency!

We need here reviewers (honest) testimonies! Please join this forum!

(.-)

the discussion is really interesting and raises the problem of transparency and lack of guidelines. I m asking Alessandro why do unpublished papers in "unais" will not be discussed corrected and resubmited if it s possible once a major reason of rejection is eliminated (problem with methodology and material, for example ....)?. it will be a way to give a second chance "energy" to the researcher to publish his paper.

@Latifa: THANK YOU!

Your idea is brilliant! But who would correct /comment this papers?¨

This is a real full time job!

Nevertheless after having post your paper on UNAIS you can take comments from colleagues.

My dream would be that once a month an "expert" would analyze and criticize an unpublished.

To tell you the truth: I am waiting for financial and Institutional support for these kind of projects! There are plenty of them.

And this support will come if UNAIS have content! So more unpublished are posted on UNAIS more chances are for UNAIS to have support!

As I usually say to myself in these kind of situation: STEP BY STEP.

I went alone with UNAIS concept and the financial investment was huge!

A nice car... Hope UNAIS will drive us somewhere where "knowledge" could be shared more easily.

Have a good day

Having consulted on and edited hundreds of papers in the social sciences and the humanities, I have seen papers rejected primarily because they are not a good fit for the journal, because they are poorly argued (according to Anglo-American argumentation norms), or because the subject matter was too limited or narrow for the broader scope of the journal. (I add here that editors and reviewers dislike reading badly written or badly edited papers--and thus are biased against them.) Occasionally, however, the researcher was using a new or highly sophisticated method that two of the three reviewers simply did not understand.

My observation is that younger (or newer) researchers tend to be more upset by rejections than more experienced researchers, who understand rejection as part of the game. Indeed, one economics professor I know tells her students to expect at least three rejections before publication, because the average rejection rate in that highly competitive field is about 80%.

One of the five strategies in my book, "Getting Published in International Journals," is journal analysis, because it is always in the researcher's best interest to analyze journals for readership, content (e.g., more quantitative or qualitative), etc. Then the researcher can eliminate all journals in which he or she has little publication chance (e.g., all contributors over the past year have been attached to UK universities). Then the researcher should analyze the target journal for everything from vocabulary, sentence length, style (e.g., active or passive writing), and organization (e.g., methodology before theory or vice versa). The better the fit of the paper (in all respects) to the journal, the better the chances of acceptance. Researchers who do meticulous journal analysis before even beginning to write report improved publication success.

Returning to the question of sending a rejected paper to another journal, again, those who have taken the advice of the editor or reviewers and who rewrote the paper after a journal analysis of the new target journal report the best success.

@Michael: thank you: I agree with you with PERSEVERANCE! This is the success'key for everything!

@Nathalie: Very interesting input: Thank you!

Nathalie I would like to hear more fro you about UNAIS because of your "key opinion position".

What do you think of all this unpublished that are vegetating somewhere in ISB stick or in a computer?

Do you know how many article are estimated to be/remain unpublished?

IS there any sense to you to know about this unpublished? Would you -anyone!- want to have access to an unpublished article? for the sake of curiosity -scientist feature by the way_-, maybe even inspiration.

Looking forward if you agree of course (:-)

Regards

@ Prashant: Thanks for your post, you are bringing an interesting issue = open a new door in this forum! Pay to publish!

Personally I never did it and I do not know how it really works. All my publication went without having payed anything.

I can see ethical issues for an author to pay....

But money it is an issue! How the other Journal gets their funds?

Wow: a lots of issues are going on on scientific publication...

Time to go to sleep for me...night!

few key words: rejected papers, never give up, perseverance, hope, honesty and transparency, funds annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnd Knowledge. Good luck for unais

Alessandro, I think the idea of UNAIS is very interesting--but I take it with a bit of caution. As a teacher of academic English, Anglo-American argumentation, and journal analysis (along with the consulting and the editing), I find that many worthy ideas and good research end up in rejected papers for the simple reason of linguistic ignorance on the part of the writer. While I haven't the time, space, or energy to recap the 300 pages of my book, I can point out that almost 100% of my clients initially had no idea that writing in English is unlike writing in any other language. English--and especially academic English--demands that every word be 100% clear; in other words, no ambiguity or poor grammar is allowed.

Moreover, in English, an intellectual is a person who uses the fewest words to give the reader the most information.

In English, we argue according to Aristotle's empiricism, so that the writer must create a watertight proof according to the logic of Aristotle. I find that too many European writers (at least in the social sciences and the humanities) narrate, discuss, or talk about their ideas instead of creating a perfect piece of logic in which every term is defined as soon as it is introduced, etc.

In the Anglo-American tradition we frame (i.e., contextualize) every section and every paragraph, not merely the paper as a whole. And native speakers do careful journal analysis before writing their papers.

Nonetheless, I have also seen worthy papers not accepted because of politics (e.g., the paper criticizes a method that one of the reviewers has developed, and a new editor is fearful of accepting a paper with a strongly negative review), or because he or she chose the wrong journal, or because his or her main thesis is critical of mainstream approaches in the field and therefore no journal wants to touch it, etc.

In such cases (and others), I have seen researchers put the papers up on their webpage (e.g., most institutes and universities have webpages for their professors) as "working papers." In one case, the editor of a prestigious journal found my friend's article on his webpage and asked him if the paper was still open for submission for a special issue.

In other cases, UNAIS might be superb for getting the work out. My first concern is that a researcher might resort too quickly to UNAIS, in his or her eagerness to be published, instead of reworking the paper and trying another journal. My other concern is how seriously the researcher's colleagues would treat a paper published in UNAIS, as opposed to one published in a "real" journal in the field.

So, Alessandro, these are my few thoughts and questions. Are they helpful?

Very very helpful! THANK YOU!

1) Agree wit the language issue! I am italian mother tongue and I cannot stand bad italian "wording"!

But do we consider that author who is not "english native" his little behind?

I do not mean at all that text should be accepted in a " bad format"!

Shouldn't be part of the Journal duty to reformat the language?

For me the only good reason to reject a paper is because of its wrong methodology and fake results! Other that that: positive, negative, non results ARE RESULTS!

My concern is the content! The knowledge! I cannot stand that an information would be hide for the rest of the humanity just because of language or politics journal issues.

Of course I am confident that an author will get with a final publication in a peer review journal. The resubmission process worths its efforts! Like all others I have been there and it was a great and learning process!

But I also learned that "all" is not transparent...and some issues are just "conflict issues" where the "scientific purpose" might be just and simply forgotten.

With UNAIS I would like to give possibility to those papers -who anyhow will remain unpublished- to be known, shared.

UNAIS'concept is not at all to compete with other peer review journal! It is more a scientific repository rather than another Journal!

But I do not know how many papers are vegetating in a file. Does anybody know?

How far authors will be willing to post them?

I do not know. But I took the option to challenge it! UNAIS is there now as an option for scientists. Even if in 1-2 years UNAIS will have no content...this will have a meaning: no papers are vegetating (?)or authors does not want to post their unpublished(?) or xyz...

I imagine a study on this specify topic. We will see.

I

In English the language (i.e., the clarity) is as important as the methodology, because if the language is not clear, the methodology will not be clear.

Journal editors do not have time--nor should they--to rewrite badly written papers. Perhaps it is because we don't have case endings in English, but if a paper is not clear in English, an editor cannot "fix" it (even if he or she wanted to) because that editor will not be able to know what the writer meant. Again, I reiterate that English is "different" because all the burden, 100% of it, falls on the writer.

That's why editors exists, whether online or locally. Every researcher must do his or her best not only as a researcher but as a writer. And most high ranking journals that I have seen make a point of telling non-native-English speakers to have a native English speaker read and edit the paper before submission. Some even have strict grammar and style guidelines--and say that they will return, without reading, any paper that does not meet those criteria.

So Alessandro, please understand that when you cross the cultural border into the world of English, clarity reigns! Above all else, a paper must be clear to a reader who does not know what the writer knows. This is a cultural given within the English linguistic community. We learn this in high school, if not earlier. From the time we learn to read, we learn that the reader has no responsibility and that the writer has all of it.

Moreover, every researcher with whom I have worked has received at least one "revise-and-resubmit" letter, with suggestions from reviewers (as opposed to outright rejections). Often the reviewers will cite the language as a problem that the researcher must fix.

In other cases, papers are sent out for review but still rejected--in which case the researcher can learn something from the reviewers' comments (if only that he or she chose the wrong journal or had bad luck with reviewers...the second of which happens occasionally but not always, so that researcher must learn to be brutally honest with him- or herself). However, if a paper receives a "desk reject" (i.e., it is immediately rejected without being sent out for review), then either the researcher has chosen the wrong journal (poor journal analysis) or has to seriously rethink his or her argument.

Again, I think that researchers with "languishing" papers need to take a good hard look at their earlier work and make the wisest decision: to complete rewrite it for a more appropriate journal (along with paying a competent editor to work on it) or to turn to something like UNAIS. If they choose the second option, however, they still need to have a native English-speaking editor edit their work for clarity. Otherwise, they run the risk of e-publishing a badly written paper--and doing so will not help their career in any way.

@Nathalie: No doubt of all you said.

Nevertheless, " bad language" is not the only reason for refusal!

Methodology, results or other reasons may come in this account.

Again -and again(:-)!- UNAIS is not a competitive/alternative solution for rejected papers and authors would not build their career there! They would at least contribute to extend and share KNOWLEDGE posting on UNAIS refused papers that ANYHOW would be never be resubmitted or unfinished papers from which they gave up.

In a way UNAIS is inviting any scientific to share their "brouillon" for the sake of it.

This is the concept, we will see what reality will be.

2) What do you think on the need that author should give his database to the Editor?

3) And what about the need of more transparency in the reviewing/publishing process?

Regards,

A

@Linda; Thank you!

Linda what is your point of you in a repository scientific "basket" of all the unpublished like UNAIS? (www.unais.net)?

KR

@Alessandro Diana

JPB Science, a self supporting organization and does not receive funding from any institution/government. Hence, the operation of the Journal is solely financed by the handling fees received from authors and some academic / corporate sponsors. The handling fees are required to meet maintenance of the journal. Being an Open Access Journal, it does not receive payment for subscription as the articles are freely accessible over the internet. Authors of articles are required to pay a fair handling fee for processing their articles. However, there are no

submission charges. Authors are required to make payment only after their manuscript has been accepted for publication.

@Prashant: Thank you for the input! Do you suggest that authors in UNAiS should pay the mentioned fee? It seems a good alternative for the site to survive and not count on donation... Can you tell me how much is this fee?

Now, If my work is good for me to get published, I will definitely try my best to get it published even after rejections. May be, the paper will look different after a few rejections, as after every rejection it will go through more and more editing. And its true some papers remains unpublished and that's because we move on with newer projects and can't devote the time needed for continuous improvement of the finished project in terms of Scientific paper......

@Alessandro Diana

Fee is very affordable and authors are required to make payment only after their manuscript has been accepted for publication.

Processing Charges for each manuscript is 1250 INR for authors from India, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh & Pakistan and 50 USD for authors from other countries.

www.jpbscience.com

Send the manuscript on [email protected]

It is not feasible to accept all the article for any publishers as they have with them the prescribed policy .However in case of rejection of the article for any reason ,Writer switch over to any of the other publisher as we are living in the area of competition .I have merely convey my opinion .

Rohit .M.Parikh

@Rohit: Thank you! I think UNAIS should be free of charge. However I have to consider financial support...

Hope "donations" will be good enough.

I have 4 sitting on my desk.

I have a list on my desk with 5 papers to write....

I have sundry articles in revision but this not means which this will be accepted; all depends from the case (from reviewers assigned)

To those who persevere, the impossible becomes a foreign word"

I think all papers in Natural sciences can be published. Because they are tractable. However, humanities and social sciences are politicized and peer-reviewers always try to frustrate authors with different approaches or (non-)agenda's. Also the editors in chief may not publish a paper with positive advise from the peer-reviewers while publishing one with negative advise. As I told you, it may be politicized, and authors may be excluded based on their nationality.

This is why a number of useless papers get published and receive a lot of citations, while a number of very good articles never gets published in the journals. I think Internet will change this practice as everyone can put his articles on the net. The whole business of citation and impact factors should get revised in the internet-era.

@ Gangadhar and Ana Paula: Thank you for sharing your numbers (:-)!

I hope you will finish and publish all your paper in peer-reveiw j!

In case one of your paper will be never accepted/resubmitted thank you for considering UNAIS (www.unais.net)!

@ Babak: thank you for your input!

I specially like it because it rings me a bell... and it seems that you know some about it!

Babak may I ask you what do you think on UNAIS ( www.unais.net) ?

Looking forward "to hear" from you...

@ Johnny: Thank you!

@ Allessandro. I think UNAIS is a good project. A refused article can get citation and prove itself to be good if it gets published. On the other hand, the very name and statement of it can deter some authors to cite its papers. There is a change in the attitude needed. You can search and article on the google scholar and see how many citations it has. In humanities and social sciences, even one citations, is very welcome.

If the idea is good - I highly recommend you to see

http://www.journals.elsevier.com/medical-hypotheses/#description

@ Johnny: Thank you! Yes, Medical Hypothesis is very useful. BUt I wander if rejected articles may published there. In fact the concept is for hypothesis in medical field. It actually should be possible for all the science fields...

I’m wondering why UN of UNAIS must (always) stand for “unpublished” while UNAIS is dedicated to “publishing” scientific articles? Maybe UNconventional publishing or UNformatted or UNfinished article publishing or so, so that the journal’s name avoids the risk to negatively affect the “cause” it defends…

@ Abdessamad: UNAIS is actually dedicated to the unpublished articles, either refused by peer-review journal either never submitted because UNfinished/ UNconventional¨

B the way I like the "UN..." concept. Maybe should be integrated in UNAIS which is more a scientific repository rathen than a "journal"...

THANKS +++ for your input!

I honored, in fact is one of the most controversial topics in the academic world and public life. Ideas, thoughts, suggestions of Chris Sawyer 'for me have a current value because it once again emphasize that the will of a researcher is required to be strong and with a large internal energy. Example that shows Mrs. is the actual and model for students and Studies ... enough scientific research goes a very difficult terrain complex where the pressure barriers is economic, social and researchers are generally in an attempt of that type that as you will have to make many sacrifices until we achieve success ...... However, it is this noble mission of science to human mod was never submitted if the conviction based on evidence of the facts is that one thing better than to date will be achieved .. .....

Hello Alessandro , Hello Chris , Hello all. I thing Chris say good answer .She say "My mentor taught me to never give up on a manuscript"

Also, if we see that an academic paper published not need to discover and to know what are the motives of failure to publish further based on recognition of the factors and causes, the motives that prevent the release we need to continue work to do was submitted