Celestin - in my experience this does not happen very often. Where it does happen, there are probably several reasons why:

1. The editor does not agree with the reviewers comments. They be more of an expert in the field. If the 'positive' comments are brief and time-hurried - then the editor may evaluate that a thorough review has not taken place - and reviews it themselves.

2. It may be a very popular journal that has 'excessive back-copy'. In this case, editors may only take the top percentage of reviewed articles for publication. Whereas you state 'predominantly positive', it may be that only articles that have only positives are accepted immediately - and then others are order-ranked. This may be an editorial board decision on the final outcome - rather than a single editor.

3. The article may be well reviewed - but outside of the 'true' scope of the journal.

4. The article may be well reviewed from a national perspective - but not of wider interest to an international audience.

Celestin - in my experience this does not happen very often. Where it does happen, there are probably several reasons why:

1. The editor does not agree with the reviewers comments. They be more of an expert in the field. If the 'positive' comments are brief and time-hurried - then the editor may evaluate that a thorough review has not taken place - and reviews it themselves.

2. It may be a very popular journal that has 'excessive back-copy'. In this case, editors may only take the top percentage of reviewed articles for publication. Whereas you state 'predominantly positive', it may be that only articles that have only positives are accepted immediately - and then others are order-ranked. This may be an editorial board decision on the final outcome - rather than a single editor.

3. The article may be well reviewed - but outside of the 'true' scope of the journal.

4. The article may be well reviewed from a national perspective - but not of wider interest to an international audience.

In addition to the comment of Dean Whitehead , where the methodology and estimation of the study is not well-motivated and not highlighted by the reviewers, the editor may turn down the manuscript.

Common reasons for rejection of research articles

1. The research paper has not been developed as per guidelines.

2. Lack of adequate research methodology.

3. Unexplained and misled research findings.

4. Research articles which do not have any substantial mark in the advancement of knowledge

Chances will be less, as the editor will send the article to reviewer who is bright knowledge in the same field

Very interesting contributions are progressively developed and thus clarifying the matter. I am grateful for your deep analysis...I agree with all of you..

Dean Whitehead . I don't agree with number 3 ; a study outside the scope of a journal is struck out early from editorial desk and never allowed to undergo a peer review. This is the essence of editorial review. Meanwhile, papers undergo two stages; editorial review and followed by peer review. For a paper to have sailed through the first stage (editorial review), definitely it must have met some basic requirements among which the scope is listed. Other editorial consideration involves journal guidelines, to mention a few. On this point, I also disagree with number 1 point of Dr Manzoor Hussain

who posited that rejection after peer review is based on guidelines of a journal. Guideline factor comes in early on the editorial desk and thus makes a paper rejection possible at this stage and can never be allowed to undergo peer review before rejection for possible re-submission.

In summary, scope and guidelines of a journal are two requirements considered by the editorial desk and never peer review's factors.

That is because there has been, over the years, a shift of the mission of scientific journals from the dissemination of science to profit enterprises. The editors now look for papers that can attract the most numerous audience.