Raed - it is true that it is not always a 'level playing field' in the world of academic publishing. That said, there do tend to be some consistencies. The more established a journal is - with good readership, citation, an established international board and good submission and review processes tend to 'attract' good quality manuscripts. Subir is correct that submitting manuscripts to such journals may offer the advantage, even if rejected, of good quality feedback to improve our work - but that is becoming less the case now in such a competitive market. For instance, many popular journals now do an initial editorial scoping exercise. If an article is rejected at this stage i.e. poor quality, unoriginal findings, outside the scope of the journal etc - then it doesn't even go through to the full review process. That said, the feedback is usually quick if this occurs.

Hi!

Your right! Many journals refuse the good quality of papers due to theirs standards, originality, and new findings. Unfortunately, only very good researchers can be published in high ranking journals, even if some papers maybe be accepted. And is true that the free of charge journals takes long time.

So, in the light of the above mentioned issues, I prefer to write few very good works for high quality journals and another manuscripts I prefer to publish as chapter in some international books. Thus, the acceptance is sure and the publication is better than in a low ranking journal.

Thank you! Have a nice weekend!

MM Nistor 

It is true that there might be some irregularities even in very good journals.  On the other hand this is also true that  rigorous reviewing and editing improves our MS considerably. So in my opinion one should go for very good journals if the standard of the MS is quite good. However, one should also try to keep track of the fact that others are not working on the same topic or not.  If yes, one can think of quick publishing in good journals too.

Raed - it is true that it is not always a 'level playing field' in the world of academic publishing. That said, there do tend to be some consistencies. The more established a journal is - with good readership, citation, an established international board and good submission and review processes tend to 'attract' good quality manuscripts. Subir is correct that submitting manuscripts to such journals may offer the advantage, even if rejected, of good quality feedback to improve our work - but that is becoming less the case now in such a competitive market. For instance, many popular journals now do an initial editorial scoping exercise. If an article is rejected at this stage i.e. poor quality, unoriginal findings, outside the scope of the journal etc - then it doesn't even go through to the full review process. That said, the feedback is usually quick if this occurs.

Wonderful responses by RG Colleagues.

Sometimes I think that special relations may play an important role in speeding the publishing process. Best regards.

Dear Raed, very good question. We already have everything, good papers, good findings, good research practice, but it seems that nothing can please the international journals' editor. The fact that a paper is accepted in one journal and rejected by the other, only confirms that there are no universally objective criteria to measure the value of the paper, but rather it depends on the view of the editor or reviewer. However, many editors and reviewers world wide do not consider the research practice in the author's country. For example, the topic X is not elaborated in country Y, but there are many researchers dealing with it in the world. Is the Y context on X really not so important? We all excerpt our ideas within the environments and conditions in the country we live in. Another example, reviewer X says the instrument is too old, reviewer Y accepts the paper? What to say, instead of conclusion that besides all the objectivity, review process, waiting for almost a year, correcting your paper and shaping it to correspondence to the reviewers' attitude ... the only answer is that we are dealing with the subjective perception of the reviewer. Nobody can know everything and nobody possess all the wisdom in the world. Probably the problem is in the country which does not respect the papers and instead look for confirmation of a foreign reviewer in order to increase their scientific value.

Kind regards,

V. Janusheva

Dean Whitehead is correct. The key is quality. Journals are very much aware of the time needed to review poor quality submissions including poor language and grammar. Unless ready for submission it will be rejected and rightly so. Submission is not a means of editing or review.

You have to present a tough paper including the scientific impact, well writing manner, clear research idea(s), excellent discussion and conclusion(s), and finally choosing a trusted and indexed journal(s) via the attached link:

www.scimagojr.com

Regards, Emad

very good scientific work to be written in a very professional way and most important the patience.

Here is the link just click on them and you will see there two options of title and abstract, and then select the field of research and click on find journal. you can see the the journals with production time, (Review time), don't select there open access, (Mean's that you are willing to pay.

Regarding selection or rejection they can't publish carp, i mean if there is much plagiarism or lack of novelty what you expect.

keep in mid the Motive to publish the work is not a milestone, to share scientific novel innovative work is the means of publication. always focus on quality not quantity.

http://journalfinder.elsevier.com/

http://journalsuggester.springer.com/