Dear Naima,

What a question !

Let us be positive. Possibly, you must take into account the possibility of errors from behalf of your reviewers. There are multiple reasons for rejecting a paper, and many of those have nothing to do with the quality of your research, as for example your English written language. Sometimes, it might be good to try another journal (for example a National Journal in your own language and cultural background) and, above all, not to give up.

Impact factors don't measure your quality as researcher, but the quality of the scientific journal in which you intend to publish. (That is what impact factor system was invented for... Erroneously, it has become current to use it to try and measure the quality of researchers, which should be done by idoneous academic acts, such as your PhD. 

Dear Naima,

What a question !

Let us be positive. Possibly, you must take into account the possibility of errors from behalf of your reviewers. There are multiple reasons for rejecting a paper, and many of those have nothing to do with the quality of your research, as for example your English written language. Sometimes, it might be good to try another journal (for example a National Journal in your own language and cultural background) and, above all, not to give up.

Impact factors don't measure your quality as researcher, but the quality of the scientific journal in which you intend to publish. (That is what impact factor system was invented for... Erroneously, it has become current to use it to try and measure the quality of researchers, which should be done by idoneous academic acts, such as your PhD. 

 I agree with the previous comments. Rejection of a manuscript is not such a rare thing to happen. Journals receive many submissions, competition is high and they have to be very selective. You may even find that in the rejection letter they let you know that they could not find anything wrong with the paper per se. Maybe it is a matther of opportunity: simply they had already published many papers on that topic recently! But definitely, if they provide any objections, try to correct the paper accordingly. These are extremely useful to improve your article. I also agree that you have to be careful to choose the journal most appropriate for your paper. I advise you to to take a careful look at their web page, read the scope and check the contens. Check the type of papers they publish to find out if your work fits well with the topics, quality, lenght and focus. 

Appropriate selection of journal reduces the risk of rejection of any research article. Sometimes country and institute name may also play role in rejection

I advice you to read this 

https://www.elsevier.com/connect/8-reasons-i-rejected-your-article

Some journals does not even give a reason for rejection. What to do with them???

Not only country and institute but also the name of the professsors or authors. If you have co-authors who are well known in that particular field then you have better chances to get your paper accepted. My colleague is always looking for a known name or someone from a renowned institute to get his papers published.

R

Not Necessarily, nobody is a bad researcher. A research need not always show positive results, it could be negative results as well. It takes only few minutes to call some thing bad only in "academics" but it takes years together to prove something bad elsewhere say in Court of law. This is my humble and emphatic opinion.

To add further, if the rejection happens along with proper guidelines and suggestions for the improvements, then such a rejection should always be deemed to be an acceptance in some unwritten terms, because,

* A researcher feels his/her direction of thinking is justified/ correct.

*Researcher feels that a few scholars i.e., reviewers have seen his/her work.

*A researcher will always forge ahead in the prudent direction and prove that he/she is a researcher worth his/her salt!!

Sometimes it may not suit the topic to a reviewer - and he not admit it - and assesses :-)

Then try another magazine.

My experience:

1. It is generally attributed to process of selection of reviewers. I have received comments which were totally irrelevant to my work.

2. Reviewers are different for 1st and 2nd review.

It is a very important question in the present research scenario. The competition is huge in all fields of research and to get an edge while making a novel contribution in ones research area is a real challenge. It depends on many parameters. To name a few, 

1. Novelty of the research

2. Identity of the author, co authors

3. Ranking of the Institute./ University

4. Funding agency

5. Country(Sometimes matters)

6. Whether the topic of research is of interest  to readers of a particular journal

7. Networking of researchers across the globe belonging to same research area(Conferences, Workshops) and discussions leading to a paper.

8. Reviewer opinion (In general, much depends on their expectations on the exposition and open-mindedness to appreciate the quality of the work for the cause of scientific progress and advancement)

1-8+ Luck matters 

Being a researcher itself is a great thing and I don't think there is a term called "bad researchers". 

Dear Prof. Hema,

My perceptions ( purely my individualistic)  about your answer are as follows:

1. Yes, research is always directed towards novelty - however timid it might be.

2. Not necessarily. Identity comes from item no. 1

3. Yes, great research have emanated from top ranking Institutes ( because of various reasons such as know how, sophistication, etc....)

4. Not necessarily - some of the excellent publications are not based on funded research.

5. How country matters?

6.We need to identify the domain related Journal only.

7. True.

8. May be to certain extent.

9. According to me , there is no place for luck. If at all luck has a place , it may be in item 8.

Yes I really agree with you, there is no bad research.

Being researcher is a virtue, not the great thing. We may research in finding novel methods in teaching it self -  research is indigenous and it is more cognitive in nature. 

The paper may get rejected due to many reasons. Some of them are

As Hema Thiagarajan  said there is no bad researcher. So feel proud that you are a researcher and you are innovating something for the betterment of the society

I never think so. we also take the count of the Reviewer's view and enrich and expand our knowledge.

Dear Naima,

Not at all. STAY POSITIVE!

If your paper is rejected, don't be discouraged. Consider whether the reviewers' comments could strengthen the paper and if there are other publication outlets that might be a better fit for that paper. 

If the reply is to "revise and resubmit", Congratulations! Many good journals have outright rejection rates of 50-75%.Carefully read the editor's recommendation, which may highlight the most important changes, or give you guidance if the reviewers give conflicting advice.Carefully read all reviewers' comments. Even if the reviewers are critical or sound harsh, try not to be offended. These are usually experts in the field who have taken their time to read and comment on your paper with a view to strengthen it. However, the "scientific culture" of many fields may lead to comments that sound sharp. However, take it as a chance to reflect on your work and improve its relevance for your colleagues. Usually, comments that sound harsh in the beginning are those that really help to improve your paper considerably. 

When my paper is rejected it means an opportunity to Improve

To correct my writing style to be more critical 

We should take it as positive step since we are all in learning curve

We must stay positive and try to improve the article and submit it again to the same or another appropriate journal. 

The following present various reasons for rejection.

Rejection reasons are always not related to manuscript quality

Low quality of the manuscript is not the only reason for rejections. Some major factors that can also affect journal decisions are: 

1. Quality and experience of peer reviewers

The quality of peer review varies widely according to reviewers’ professional experience, educational background, research interests, etc.

 2. Volume of submissions

For obvious reasons, journals that attract a large number of submissions will also reject a large number of manuscripts. For example, Nature receives 10,000 submissions a year, making the rejection of even high quality manuscripts inevitable.

 3 Journal’s decision-making policy

This varies widely among journals. For example, some journals follow a policy of rejecting any manuscript that will require major revisions, while some journals will complete another round of another peer review if they are unsure of the manuscript quality.

4 The journal editor is looking for something specific at a particular time

Sometimes, journal editors may wish to publish a thematic issue of the journal or may be interested in a current hot topic, in which case they might tend to accept more papers focusing on that particular topic.

 5. The journal receives more than one submission on the same topic

In such cases, the journal may well choose to publish only one of the manuscripts, rejecting the other for no other reason than that they already have a paper on a similar topic.

A few related references

Pierson DJ (2004). The top 10 reasons why manuscripts are not accepted for publication. Respiratory Care, 49(10): 1246-52.

Ajao OG (2005). Some reasons for manuscript rejection by peer-reviewed journals. Annals of Ibadan Postgraduate Medicine, 3(2): 9-12.

Ali J (2010). Manuscript rejection: Causes and remedies. Journal of Young Pharmacists, 2(1): 3-6. doi: 10.4103/0975-1483.62205.

Kumar M (2009). A review of the review process: manuscript peer-review in biomedical research. Biology and Medicine, 1(4): 1-16.

Schultz DM (2010). Rejection rates for journals publishing in the atmospheric sciences. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 91(2), 231-243. doi: 10.1175/2009BAMS2908.1.

-------------------------------------------------------

The attached link (Eight reasons I rejected your article, Peter Thrower, PhD, Editor-in-Chief of Carbon, the international journal of the American Carbon ) presents various reasons for rejection from an Editor's point of view.

When a manuscript is submitted to a high-quality scholarly journal, it goes through intense scrutiny — even before it's seen by the editor-in-chief and selected for peer review. At Elsevier, between 30 percent to 50 percent of articles don't even make it to the peer review process.

1. It fails the technical screening.

2. It does not fall within the Aims and Scope.

3. It's incomplete.

4. The procedures and/or analysis of the data is seen to be defective.

5. The conclusions cannot be justified on the basis of the rest of the paper.

6. It's is simply a small extension of a different paper, often from the same authors.

7. It's incomprehensible.

8. It's boring.

https://www.elsevier.com/connect/8-reasons-i-rejected-your-article

not necessarily .. rejection might be related to many reasons .. for me it's good opportunity to improve my work

Dear Mam

In research, failure or rejection of our work is very fruitful for us according to future prospective.

If we get negative comments from reviewer, it doesn't mean that our work is not good. All reviewers have their point of view regarding each topics. These negative comments help us to modified the paper again and also we get new ideas for writing a new paper.

In my research papers I always get negative comments even rejection of paper also. However, from their comments, i again modified my paper and submit to higher journal and get acceptance.

I know that when any one get rejection of their paper, what he/she feel at that time. But he/she get benefit of negative comments in future.

Hi,

Things to do when your paper is rejected

Feel happy that the journal lost a chance to host your highly valuable work!

Now,  resend your paper to another high quality journal

try to correct the paper by answering the reviewers constructive queries in your work.

 Discard the insulting negative comments.

life goes on!

What we must doing when our paper is rejected by journal is that mean that we are bad researchers?

Don't be discouraged - it is normal in initial rounds our submitted papers being rejected by especially top tier journals.  Initially I felt like what you feel now but after a while I did the following:

To me no article fail to find a journal to publish it if you put in serious effort into it.  This serious effort required commitment & perseverance.  Wishing you all the best.

Yesterday I joined a brief conference about how to publish an article. The presenter shared his experiences, one of which makes me interesting is the popular way some PhD academics in our community joining a "Reject" day in their university. Thus, I suggest that you would find that familiar event to join or self-organize a day like that in your university or your country. Best regards.

In a different view, you are on the way to be published. You should try to do better and better yourself or would ask some help from your experienced supervisors.

Reasons for Rejection

There can be a number of reasons; the most prominent ones (non-limiting) are discussed:

 Lack of Novelty, originality, and presentation of obsolete study

Novelty and unobviousness are the primary criteria that an editor of a scientific journal stresses upon the most. A mouth dissolving tablet preparation of a drug with conventional methods, technology, and / or known excipients presents no novelty to the existing state of the field unless the researcher demonstrates something new, adding to the existing knowledge. Also there is little or no scientific value in presenting an obsolete study, when newer methods are already available.

Improper rationale

The objective of doing research is to emphasize with proper justifications, backed by sufficient data. A controlled release formulation of a practically water insoluble drug may be denied on these grounds straight away. The whole manuscript should revolve along the rationale, which should be the central theme of the article. Usually the aim(s) and objective(s) should form the last sentence under the introduction section. Lack of focus and failure to adhere to the theme of the manuscript contributes to rejection. Probably in an attempt to have a voluminous article many manuscripts wander away from the objective, referring to things that are not within the scope of the study.

Unimportant and irrelevant subject matter

Publications in peer-reviewed journals are to disseminate knowledge. Therefore for a manuscript to be published in a well-recognized, international journal it must have significant scientific value. Again the editor is in search of something that is new and at the same time fulfills the requirements of the scope of his journal.

Flaws in methodology

Some manuscripts reflect improper methodology of the work done in the research study. This is attributed to the poor literature survey before starting the work, demonstrating the paltry knowledge of the researcher. A 300 mg tablet prepared using an 8 mm round punch will cause increased thickness in the tablet and is actually not suitable to be prepared. If this is shown in the manuscript it will make an unscientific impression in the mind of the reviewers. This may not be reflected in the reviewers’ comments to the author, but may be presented to the Editor-in-Chief in the confidential comments. If the methodology of a study is flawed or questionable, the result is bound to be flawed or questionable as well, and many highly rated peer-reviewed journals will not accept such a study.

Lack of interpretations

The researcher should have a sufficient know-how to interpret the exact reasons of the research outcome. Even if the results are out of specifications, the author should be able to critically interpret the cause in the discussion section. It is not mandatory to show positive outcomes alone. Manuscripts can support future research if they accurately interpret the root cause of the negative results.

Inappropriate or incomplete statistics

Application of statistics in the methodology and results sections of a manuscript creates an extra edge over the others, statistics being the need of the moment. Precisely showing the results with application of statistical principles will increase the probability of acceptance of the manuscript.

Reviewers’ field of knowledge and discretion

Sometimes, as an oversight the manuscript may be sent to a reviewer who may not be an expert in the field of the subject under review and he may give a casual glance to the manuscript deciding its eventual fate. In such cases it is believed that there are more chances of the manuscript getting accepted, however, the reverse may also happen. Although, in reputed international journals, the Editor-in-Chief will certainly consult another reviewer if the comments from one or two of them do not appear to be an outcome of critical evaluation.

Inappropriateness for the journal

The Editor-in-Chief always looks at the scope of the research study with respect to that of the journal before deciding whether to send it for reviewing. Some journal will look for research related to lead molecules rather than the existing and established drug molecules, unless the manuscript is out of the ordinary. Also the time of publication and the value of the particular subject matter being published in a journal are also critical.

Lack of in vivo studies

With the advent of sophisticated in vivo drug estimation technologies and methods to estimate the drug concentrations in minute quantities in a particular subject, a manuscript appears to be handicapped if the in vitro data is not supported by relevant in vivo findings and correlations. Acceptance of the manuscripts relying completely on the data generated solely through in vitro evaluations is something that is difficult in the present scenario.

Inappropriate packaging of the manuscript

In some cases, a less than borderline article may be published if well-packaged. In some cases an assessor finds it difficult to distinguish between ‘introduction’ and ‘discussion’. Introduction is to introduce the subject under research and to give the objective(s) and / or aim(s) of the article. The ‘discussion’ is to discuss the research, making references to similar studies done previously and interpreting the results obtained. ‘Materials and methods’ should be detailed enough so that any reader can duplicate the study. In fact this is good for verification of the authenticity of the study. The ‘Discussion’ should be relevant to the study. Previous studies that support or disagree with the present study should be mentioned. Impressions and guess work should be avoided. Any important statement that is not the direct result of the study should have a reference. The discussion should be limited to what has been studied.

Journals’ popularity and the priority given to the manuscript by the editor

Some manuscripts have potential, however, due to the popularity of the journal and due to the large number of hits to the journal the prospective manuscripts have to be declined as they face tough competition from the even superior research manuscripts kept in a higher grade by the Editor-in-Chief. However, if such a study is denied on these grounds, it sooner or later is able to find a fitting place in some other popular equally rated

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3035881/