If the period is Reasonable then justified for peer review . But if the time is infinite then it will be a malpractice .

If a manuscript is not falling in the scope of the the journal, the editors can decide at once when they have a first glance of the manuscript. So rejections should not last too long to waste the time of the authors.

In my own opinion as a privileged reviewer to some journals, i feel the job of an editor will be faster in making decisions when the reviewers turn in their reports in good time. But if reviewers refused to submit their reports in good time, making decisions on the manuscript by the editor may be difficult.

I also know that some high impact journals are credited to giving decisions on manuscript very late even after all review reports are ready. To be i feel they are just buying time because they are known to publishing articles in 6- 12 months duration.

I too faced this problem but not all the editors will do this. It should be fast to decide whether the MS falls to the scope of the journal or not.

Procrastination and lack of professional courtesy!

Just to support the point raised by Dr. Amina Sultan, one of my colleagues's manuscript was rejected after waiting for about 8 months with no prior knowledge about the rejection move. It was so frustrating for her to be encouraged to move on.

If the period is Reasonable then justified for peer review . But if the time is infinite then it will be a malpractice .

There are rules, but there is practice.

In reality, the editor is faced with an insane stream of articles, some of which are obviously not worthy for publication. These are rejected immediately, (sometimes even without a reviewer). A small part of the proposed articles is what should obviously be published and as quickly as possible (criteria for evaluating articles are a topic for a separate discussion). Remain articles - "stream", i.e. that which may be published ... or may be rejected.

The publication of these articles depends on the occupancy of the next issue. As soon as the editor understands that he has enough good articles to publish, he "dumps" his "stock". Sometimes this does not happen right away, but after a few months ... Sometimes, if the next issue is incomplete, he takes the best articles from the "stock". It’s quite clear.

There are many reasons why editors might not able to proceed: they wait for review reports, the scope of the article is difficult to judge so as to arrive at a firm decision. For example these days interdisciplinary - studies are on the rise, or a new journal policy might be on its way. In this respect "reasonable" can be a subjective concept and academic considerations may lead the editor to modify the scope-policy of his or her journal. At the same time there might be disagreement between the members of the editorial board as well. Yours sincerely, Bulcu Szekely

Dear Colleagues, I thank you all for your opinions, and we do not disagree, but most often, it is intended that the editor retains the manuscript for months (not days) and then gives the decision (ٌReject) for not being in the scope or has no priority among the manuscripts submitted for publication. Otherwise, the editor has an area of excuse

For some bad experience in this aspect that I have had, I add the fact that not only is there a delay in the editor's response period, but after the long wait, one finds the editor's response that his document is out of scope of publication, without even going through the peer review process. When you decide to send the document to that particular publication, it is because you have verified that your document is in line with the articles published in that scientific journal! This behavior of certain publishers is completely incomprehensible.

I feel editor should make all manuscripts pass through desk review to determine those that need immediate rejection and the authors will appreciate if it is communicated to them in good time.

Rejection of a manuscript doesn't say the manuscript cannot be re-prepared and resubmitted to another journal considering the issues raised by the editor(s) communicated through the desk reviewer.

I believe that moods and the country of the author play a role in the decision to accept or reject the manuscript

The established deadlines for any work help a person better organize their activities.

Dear Researchers,

In case of manuscript rejection with the comments that it is not in the scope of the Journal or it didn't receive priority to go further, then the rejection may be either from the Editor's desk or from the reviewer(s).

A submitted manuscript is normally desk-rejected if the research does not match the scope of the concerned journal or if the quality is not as per the journal's standards.

Whenever, the content of the submitted manuscript is too novel and difficult to understand, it needs more and more time to search the suitable reviewers and associate editor.

It depends on many factors, including a huge number of submitted papers..

Hi,

I have had such experiences with reputed journals during the initial days of my research. I later realized that journals would also require big names and brands for their popularity. For the sake of accommodating an article from the editor's acquaintances or a big name, big institution, they tend to send back a fresh/novice researcher's article citing "out of scope" as the best suitable reason. As researchers in dire necessity of articles, we have to put up with such practices. Where do you think the present breed of researchers goes about complaining?

to: Navnit Kumar Ramamoorthy

You said the right thing. I have had similar experiences. Unfortunately, some reputed journals reject good articles of novice researchers without reviewing (just because of "out of scope"). These journals tend to publish articles by big authors affliated to big international institutions. In my opinion, this creates a kind of discrimination between the authors.

A good journal is a journal that relies on the moral side as well as on the academic side and may not reject any research on discriminatory grounds.

  Good research is not measured in the name of its author, but is measured by the effort made by it and by the scientific material and innovation that includes it, especially the author’s dependence on a healthy scientific methodology in writing research and articles according to academic specialization.

My greetings

I think the main reason that some editors did not make their decision regarding the manuscripts presented in a reasonable period is because they are busy with big research matters so that they do not have much time that makes them evaluate the research paper during a small time period, that is, the reasons are purely academic

I don't believe is ethnical regardless of whether the editor is busy or not. The integrity of the journal is questionable in this instance.

Please read the following on related issue:

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/12/rude-paper-reviews-are-pervasive-and-sometimes-harmful-study-finds?utm_source=Nature+Briefing&utm_campaign=10b26858f6-briefing-wk-20191213&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c9dfd39373-10b26858f6-42782915

Some editors are mere human being, with all minor shortcomings! And some are even worse, when they are protected by large publishing houses...

They should be condemned and exposed!!

Depends on the journal policy in publishing the articles.

A good journal give the feedback as soon as posible.

Normally Journals are publishing the time duration with regard to notice of decisions and there are systems to track the status, if not could send a status inquiry and later a follow up. However, professionalism is what matters and editors need to correspond at least...

It is probably a good idea to send your paper to the editor before you officially submit it for review to ask if your paper is within their scope. This avoids you formatting your paper and waiting for a formal answer if you go the submission route.

Каждый случай уникальный.