It has been a policy of many so called "reputable" journals to give Editors mandate for upfront or desk rejections of submitted papers with a claim of minimizing the workload fort their reviewers and decision times for manuscripts (which can be attended accordingly) that are (in qualified Editors perception) found unsuitable. Since reviewers are critical in evaluating manuscript's contributions soundness, it can be observed that Editors only find something to do for their mutual existence.
On the other hand, this gives room to predatory journals that invariably offers fast publication processes that could easily compromise any existed sound contribution conclusions and research directions.
I've been desk rejected twice, once was justified, and another was not. The case that was justified was because the editor felt that the paper wasn't of much interest to an international audience as my paper was regional in theme. I can live with that one. The unjustified one was a case where the editor was actually honest in his poor ethics. He said he would not send it out for review because it was too similar to paper that his team was about to publish in his journal.
I've experienced it and found that there are always better journals that do accept a sound article. The reasons for rejection are not always unsuspicious.
On the other side, some editors do reject articles on bad reviews (bad as in unacceptable).
I don't think, desk rejection of research paper is bad , since it just reduces the work load of secretariat of the journal
. You cal always resubmit it in a renewed form to go ahead with peer reviews. High impact factor journals adopt this policity quite strictly and nothing wrong in it. Many times
the manuscript coming to us to review in such a raw form that it doesn't fit to the standards of local journals. Therefore , desk rejection of manuscript , provided properly seen , is quite a decision to be respected. To a author, every manuscript he submits to a journal , believes that it should invariably be accepted regardless of its , content , scientific hypothesis , presentation of results , picking up the gap ...you go on narrating...
- Badges
- Science topic