11

I have tried to submit some of my papers on unrelated topics to a journal and gotten rejected, either desk rejection or rejection after peer review, by the journal. Recently I worked out a new paper and would like to submit it to this journal again.

The reasons for rejections have never been elementary ones, say "poor English" or "of poor quality" or something like these (I know all these reasons from my peers). For most of the time parlance such as "the results are not significant enough to warrant publication in ..." is the reason.

Then I would like to know: Does my records in that journal significantly affect the viewpoints of the editors on my current submission?

14

My guess about the situation is that your prior rejections will not significantly affect the editors' opinions on your new submission.

However, the fact of your prior repeated rejections is evidence that you are misjudging the suitability of your papers for that journal, either the aptness of the topic(s), or the level and quality. Thus, if I had to wager, I'd bet that you'll be rejected again... not because you were rejected before, but because the factors in play that led to your prior rejections will most likely manifest themselves in the present case.

So, really, you should get more-specific advice from an advisor or mentor about appropriate venue(s) for your papers, as well as possibly critiques of the writing style.

  • Thanks; that reminds me of the important information. If possible, please be referred to the edited question. – Benicio Jan 13 '15 at 17:01
  • 1
    @Chou Your edited question suggests that this answer is relevant in your case. – Jessica B Jan 13 '15 at 17:20
  • @JessicaB: Yes, I just would like to inform the kind answerers of updates :) – Benicio Jan 13 '15 at 17:22
  • 2
    Well, some evidence. By coincidence, I just received the following email from an eminent senior mathematician just now in response to my somewhat plaintive request for advice on where to submit a paper proving a result I had written to tell him about: "But these days it's seems to be quite random, because the good journals are getting so many excellent papers. [My colleague Professor X] said something like (he's an editor for [Very Good But Not Top Journal Y]) 'I've been rejecting papers that I have no right to reject.'" – Pete L. Clark Jan 14 '15 at 4:13
13

The answer lies in why they have been rejected. Papers can be rejected because they are unsuitable for the journal, are of low quality either technically or scientifically or both. You should have received some words of why the rejections came about. There is of course a chance that an editor will tire from seeing papers to be rejected from the same author time and again and that this will lead to preconceived ideas that all output from that author is of the same quality.

So key for a successful submission is to find out why rejection has occurred. Try to avoid any mistakes that can be the grounds for the rejection. Supply the manuscript in exactly the way any Instructions for Authors dictate. Provide a good accompanying letter for the submission that details the importance of the research and the conclusions you have reached as well as why the journal appears to be suitable for your point of view.

  • Thanks; that reminds me of the important information. If possible, please be referred to the edited question. – Benicio Jan 13 '15 at 17:02

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.