I have reviewed fifty-plus journal article manuscripts, and on average I have rejected 85% of all manuscripts.
If you have reviewed multiple journal article manuscripts, on average approximately how much percent of manuscripts have you rejected?
Also, what are common reasons for your rejection decision?
Dear Dr. @Don Soo Chon
Greating!
I think that
1) The results presented in the research or the article are weak in which the results are quoted (polgarsim)and not added to the field of research .................................. The results summarized in the end of the search results not from the results of the research .............. Perhaps the language of the article does not rise to scientific development or the results are incorrect And I think there are more reasons. @
With best wishes.
He revisado aproximadamente un centenar. Los rechazos obedecen al poco a aporte ala camo de estudios aspectos epistemológicos y metódicos que inciden sobre el trabajo .
Don Soo Chon , since this is a discussion you should start by mentioning your reasons for rejecting about 85% of the manuscript you reviewed.
Dear Hassan,
Good question. Common reasons for my rejection decision are:
1. No potential significant contribution to the research subject as the manuscript has no significant improvement from prior works regarding theory development and research methodology. Many authors simply attempt to repeat prior works without making a significant progress.
2. It is not clear what the author(s) attempt to achieve. One of common reasons for it is that the manuscript is not focused, which is so much distracting.
3. Many manuscripts submitted to a peer-review journal are poorly carried out. For example, one researcher performed statistical analysis by using a sample size of a little over 20 that was collected in a country. The author can perform case study, but it is not very appropriate for statistical analysis with such a small sample size.
4. There are many other reasons for my rejection decision.
Don Soo Chon Your first reason is the most powerful reason of rejection. In fact if their is no any potential significant improvement from prior works with respect to theory and methods, the work deserved to be rejected. However, sometimes manuscripts submitted for peer-review contains an improvement concerning applications in the concerned field without any improvement from the theoretical point of view. What kind of decision will you recommend for such kind of manuscripts?
Dear Hassan,
Significant improvement should include applications as well as theory and methodology. With my discipline (Criminology) and my specialty area, however, I have not had much opportunity to review a manuscript that focus on applications.
I believe that many manuscripts in other disciplines such as engineering, medicine, and other disciplines focus on the improvement in applications.
Thanks.
Don
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Philology
- Classical Philology
- Manuscripts