I submitted a paper in a renowned journal. The first decision was a major revision (revise and resubmit) asking questions. I answered them all and the reviewers were happy with the answers. The second decision was reject and the reason told by the associate editor was that this kind of work is not in correct place in this journal and we should try some other journal. My point is that they could have rejected that in the first review only if this is the reason of rejection.

My question: Is such a rejection common?

  • 3
    What is your question? – ff524 Sep 14 '17 at 16:28
  • 8
    In principle, this should happen very rarely - as you say, whether a paper fits the journal scope should be clear upon submission or after first review. I can imagine it happening if the edits significantly clarified the paper, and changed the editor's understanding of the paper's main purpose, or place in the context of the literature. – AJK Sep 14 '17 at 17:24
  • 2
    Maybe the major revisions improved the paper. If so, it will be a better paper when you submit to another journal. Thus, you gained by this! – GEdgar Sep 29 '17 at 13:03

Your Answer

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

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.