Top reasons for paper rejection

[1] Poor fit with the journal- topic is either broader or too narrow. Therefore,

 Read carefully the aims and scope of the target journal

 Skim over the papers published in recent issues of the target journal

 Volunteer yourself as the potential reviewer for the target journal

[2] Lack of novelty and significance. Journals expect manuscripts with solid theoretical
foundations that address important issues and offer new theoretical insights.
Manuscripts that simply apply a well-established theory and test it in a new context
(e.g., new technologies) or in certain countries without adding new theoretical insights
or highlighting its unique contributions are unlikely to be sent out for peer review.
Therefore,

 Communicate the novelty and significance of your work in the cover letter

 Pay attention to the structured abstract and use it as an opportunity to highlight the
novelty and significance of your research

[3] Poor preparation

 Poor English language: Readability, proof-read (typos and grammatical errors)?

Manuscript presentation: Authors’ Guidelines? Citations (any missed), referencing
style, manuscript length

 Ethical issues: Necessary ethical standards, plagiarism

 The structure, clarification of argument, logic progression, coherence, etc. will all
contribute to the quality standard of the manuscript.

[4] Tell a story: a single story from start to finish

 The problem occurs when that story is not strong, not clear, does not exist, and the
paper as a whole is not cohesive (esp. in objectives, method and findings).

[5] Know the journal audience- the tribe you are submitting to

 Explain how your research fits with their goal and style

[6] Making story and contribution (a little) Promethean- Initiation great, while
prospective weak, or juxtaposed
[7] Lack of theoretical consideration and support– Always adequate consideration of
relevant theories in the field and your contribution to theory and theoretical
development.

 Make it clear how the manuscript is relevant to the context

 Achieved through explaining how you have made a contribution to the theoretical
development.

 Identify the gap in the literature that your study addresses, and how filling that gap
will advance practice and science.

 Describe the problem your paper addresses with clear statistics and arguments
supported by position statements or priorities from authoritative bodies and recent
literature.

 Be transparent about how the manuscript relates to other published work- poor
quality leads to very low on synthesis

[8] Cite international literature and explain how the manuscript is relevant in a global
context-preference.

 Many authors focus on their own country and do not include international literature.

[9] Always begin the article by setting out the global context, supported by international
literature and to conclude the article with some consideration in its broad applicability.

[10] Weak methodology- non-validated instruments or conducted a quasi-experiment when

an experiment was warranted.

 Always write the methods section clearly and completely.

[11] Concerns about integrity- inappropriate or unethical focus.

[12] Use appropriate reporting guidelines- for example EQUATOR

[13] When publishing a literature review or clinical trial, be clear about the approach and
register the review before submission if possible- for e.g. PROSPERO or in a publicly
accessible database

[14] Respond to editor and reviewer feedback either by making the requested changes or by
offering a point-by-point rebuttal- avoid sending revised version of a manuscript back
with previously identified issues not either addressed or rebutted.
Always focus on addressing significance, knowledge advance, sound methodology, and
language,