Rejection rate and reasons for rejection after peer review: a case study of a Russian economics journal

Abstract

 Background:  Peer review remains the only way of filtering and improving research. However, there are few studies of peer review based on the contents of review reports, because access to these reports is limited. Objectives: To measure the rejection rate and to investigate the reasons for rejection after peer-review in a specialized scientific journal.  Methods:  We considered the manuscripts submitted to a Russian journal, namely ‘Economy of Region’ (Rus Экономика региона), from 2016 to 2018, and analysed the double-blind review reports related to rejected submissions in qualitative and quantitative terms including descriptive statistics. Results: Of the 1653 submissions from 2016 to 2018, 324 (20%) were published, giving an average rejection rate of 80%. Content analysis of reviewer reports showed five categories of shortcomings in the manuscripts: breaches of publication ethics, mismatch with the journal’s research area, weak research reporting (a major group, which accounted for 66%of the total); lack of novelty, and design errors. We identified two major problems in the peer-review process that require editorial correction: in 36% of the cases, the authors did not send the revised version of the manuscript to the journal after receiving editorial comments and in 30% of the cases, the reviewers made contradictory recommendations. Conclusions: To obtain a more balanced evaluation from experts and to avoid paper losses the editorial team should revise the journal’s instructions to authors, its guide to reviewers, and the form of the reviewer’s report by indicating the weightings assigned to the different criteria and by describing in detail the criteria for a good paper.

Le "Desk Rejection" : Pourquoi cela se produit et comment l’éviter ?

“…Les pratiques, les niveaux d'exigence et les motifs qui incitent les rédacteurs en chef de chaque revue à rejeter une soumission avant même qu'elle ne soit examinée par des évaluateurs varient considérablement d'une publication à l'autre (Ansell et al, 2021 ;Balyakina & Kriventsova, 2021 ;Billsberry, 2014 ;Hillaire-Marcel, 2022 ;Sun & Linton, 2014).…”

Major reasons involved in rejection of scientific research papers –an issue faced by the authors

“…The paper lacks novelty, unable to add new knowledge in the existing literature or lacks originality. 2 6. Research Methodology: Ambiguous introduction, error in methodology, poor data presentation and poor discussion of the research hypothesis and the results in the light of existing lnowledge.…”

“…1 Balyakina stated that 20% rejection rate was seen among 1653 submissions and reported ethical problems, design errors, lack of novelty and the paper being out of scope of the receiving journal were the main reasons.but among them the major reason was weak reporting of the research. 2 Out of 41 submissions, Oyebanji A stated that 63.4% of the papers had poor preparation of manuscript, and 17.1% papers were rejected because the manuscript was out of the scope of the journal. 3 The editorial priority is always linked to publish high quality of scholarly work justified by an appropriate study design.…”

Editorial: How to develop a quality research article and avoid a journal desk rejection

“…The literature has highlighted the scant levels of research that focus on rejection (Balyakina & Kriventsova, 2021), with existing studies positing theories on the underlying causes and institutional practices that result in desk rejection rates of between 20% and 50% (Ansell & Samuels, 2021;Balyakina & Kriventsova, 2021;Hassell, 2021). What is clear, is that there exists a significant gap between the aims and expectations of authors, and the requirements of journal Editors.…”