We know that journal editors accept or reject submitted manuscripts based on reviewers' comments and feedback. A manuscript that has been rejected by one journal may find its way to publication in another one. This is normal and manuscripts could be selected, to some extent, on a competitive basis that is directly proportional to the magnitude of manuscript submission flow to the journal. My question is how it is reasonable that a journal publish the rejected manuscript titles with reviewers' and editors' reasons for such rejection; possibly as an annex at the end of the journal issue. This matter could be stated in Author's Guidelines of the journal. Would this lead to more transparency in publishing scientific articles?
As I know, most journals do not archive any of the rejected manuscripts. They announce that they cancel all correspondences regarding the rejected manuscripts, including correspondences and reviewers` comments.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Philology
- Classical Philology
- Manuscripts