If the domain are listed in the scope of the journal, without checking the research article domain many editors rejected the paper stated that "Your manuscript does not fit within the scope of the journal".
The editors have a more complete view of the goals, scope and requirements of their journal than can be conveyed on a web page. Many factors would influence a decision about whether to send a manuscript out for review, or whether to say "this paper does not seem right for us."
Even though, all the criterion's are satisfied also many Editor rejected papers within a week (some cases within a day) without sending proper explanation. Most of the researchers are in beginner stage. If they are mentioned the flaws in this paper means, we can correct. Simply rejecting and stated that Manuscript does not fit within the scope of the journal means how we do? After seeing the scope of the Journal only we are applied. I will welcome any criticism, advise, contribution or suggestion. Thanks for spending your valuable time for answering.
From my experience, some journal editors welcome novelty, articles dissimilar with previously published ones on that journal issue or volume, articles that convey unique points about a resource poor setting, and so on. Some may have a lot of manuscripts sent in and may "naively" select a few from the pool of manuscripts to be sent to reviewers based on their scope and some of the aforementioned factors, including grammar.
I agree with you that start-up researchers learn a great deal from reviewer's comments, even if its rejected. A lot of editors however hide under "scope of the journal" when rejecting a manuscript. Like I was once told, if your article is rejected take a second look at it make some corrections, reflect on your writing style-including title, and send it to some other journal.
From point of my experience as reviewer. If you want your paper to be accepted you must take care of matching the journal with the area of the research, and you have to focus on orgenality, your model, your methodology and you disscution