I'm pursuing my PhD (fourth year). My institute has the following rule:
At least Two SCI papers is mandatory for awarding doctorate degree.
I tried for publishing an SCI paper recently and got rejection. Two reviewers provided comments, given below in concise manner, for rejection
Language is not good;
Proposed method is just a composition of couple of existing methods;
I am undergoing panic since I am in pre-final year of my doctorate degree.
But, I keep on asking colleagues and other friends in my academic network how to handle the situation and I categorized their suggestions in to two categories:
Majority of the people are saying that it is totally or mostly up to the mindset of the reviewer(s). The selection of journal is wrong according to them. They are saying that I need to search for the new journal, accepting such papers, by improving the language alone. If I keep on trying like that, one day I will get acceptance.
One person is saying that since the core of the proposed method cannot be improved and the language alone can be improved. It is better to drop the idea of sending to multiple journals and need to try for totally new technique or method and developing a new paper and then sending it for review.
None of the the people giving advice has published in an SCI journal. They are just giving me a guidance.
Is it true that reviewer's mindset play a role? Is the guidance to resubmit the same paper (with improved language) to a different journal a good idea?