Is recieving such an email on desk rejection a good sign?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of receiving a desk rejection email from a journal, particularly focusing on whether the editor's comments indicate the paper's potential for publication or if the rejection is merely a reflection of the paper's misalignment with the journal's scope. Participants explore the nuances of editorial feedback and the appropriateness of journal selection.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the editor's comments indicate a thorough reading of the paper, which might imply that the paper has merit, but others argue that this does not necessarily mean it is publishable.
  • It is noted that the rejection was due to the paper being out of the journal's scope, which some participants argue is a common reason for desk rejection and does not reflect the paper's quality.
  • One participant emphasizes the importance of understanding a journal's scope before submission, suggesting that failing to do so reflects poorly on the submitter's preparation.
  • Another participant expresses frustration over the submitter's lack of engagement with the journal's content, arguing that it undermines effective communication in the academic process.
  • There is a discussion about the submitter's self-identification as not being an active researcher and their belief in the originality of their idea, which some participants challenge as insufficient justification for the submission.
  • The conversation includes personal reflections on communication difficulties and the impact of academic interactions on the submitter's social experience.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of the editor's feedback and the appropriateness of the submission. There is no consensus on whether the rejection is a good sign or a reflection of the submitter's approach to journal selection.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the importance of familiarity with a journal's scope and the potential consequences of submitting work that does not align with it. There are unresolved issues regarding the submitter's understanding of their research's originality and the appropriateness of their submission strategy.

Ahmed1029
Messages
109
Reaction score
40
I recently submitted a self-authored article with no affiliation to a peer reviewed journal, which then got desk rejected. The email however wasn't a generic one; the editor made a comment about its content that clearly indicates he read the whole thing, but he didn't correct me or say anything that indicates that the paper was of low value. He then said that the paper was out of the journal scope and then suggested some other journals to transfer my paper to. Does this mean he thinks my paper is publishable? Or is this just routine?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ahmed1029 said:
but he didn't correct me or say anything that indicates that the paper was of low value.
I wouldn't expect an editor to do that because that would be peer review. I wouldn't read anything into the email you got other than this paper's topic makes it unsuitable for the journal you sent it to.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters, Wrichik Basu and Ahmed1029
Ahmed1029 said:
He then said that the paper was out of the journal scope and then suggested some other journals to transfer my paper to.
This has no indication on whether the paper is publishable or not. It simply means that the journal you submitted to doesn't cover the subject matter of your paper. Look into submitting to a different journal which publishes papers in your subfield. You should already have a list of such journals from the papers you have cited in your paper/you have read.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ahmed1029
Ahmed1029 said:
He then said that the paper was out of the journal scope
This is not good. As a submitter, you should have known this. If you didn't, that''s because you aren't reading that journal regularly. Wanting to publish without reading is like wanting to talk without listening. It does not make for effective communication. It just makes them cross.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: phinds, Ahmed1029 and berkeman
Vanadium 50 said:
This is not good. As a submitter, you should have known this. If you didn't, that''s because you aren't reading that journal regularly. Wanting to publish without reading is like wanting to talk without listening. It does not make for effective communication. It just makes them cross.
I'm not an active researcher; I just have an idea that I think is too outlandish to have been published before, but I think it's very scientifically sound. I decided to submit it and see what the reviewers have to say about it.
 
Ahmed1029 said:
I'm not an active researcher; I just have an idea that I think is too outlandish to have been published before, but I think it's very scientifically sound. I decided to submit it and see what the reviewers have to say about it.

I don't see how this is a rebuttal to Vanadium's post.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: phinds, berkeman, Vanadium 50 and 1 other person
Office_Shredder said:
I don't see how this is a rebuttal to Vanadium's post.
Then you have to read more carefully
 
  • Skeptical
Likes   Reactions: berkeman and russ_watters
Ahmed1029 said:
Then you have to read more carefully
No, it is you that has a problem with not reading what others say, as evidenced by
  1. your submission to an inappropriate journal;
  2. your presumption that your idea has not been published before without apparently checking this;
  3. your belief that "I am not an active researcher" addresses @Vanadium 50's comment that you need to read (many issues of) a journal before you can contribute to it; and
  4. your own admission that you have communication difficulties
    Ahmed1029 said:
    A big cause of my loneliness in my environment is that I can almost never have a meaningful conversation.
Can you access counselling or other help for your difficulties within your academic, work or home environment?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman, Vanadium 50 and russ_watters
You asked if this was a good sign. I answered that. Now you want to argue that.
 
  • #10
Vanadium 50 said:
You asked if this was a good sign. I answered that. Now you want to argue that.
No I'm not arguing with you, I in fact completely agree with you. I simply told the other person to read my response carefully because he didn't seem to get what I wanted to say.
 
  • #11
pbuk said:
No, it is you that has a problem with not reading what others say, as evidenced by
  1. your submission to an inappropriate journal;
  2. your presumption that your idea has not been published before without apparently checking this;
  3. your belief that "I am not an active researcher" addresses @Vanadium 50's comment that you need to read (many issues of) a journal before you can contribute to it; and
  4. your own admission that you have communication difficulties
Can you access counselling or other help for your difficulties within your academic, work or home environment?
What does this have to do with the fact that he didn't get what my response was saying? Why are we even arguing here?
 
  • #12
@Ahmed1029 whether you want to listen or not, the reality is that your approach to scientific investigation is wrong, all but certain to fail, and disrespectful to the people who's time you are wasting by asking them to review your paper. Your explanation of why you are doing it doesn't make those problems go away.

There's no point in further debate, so this thread is closed.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: pbuk and Vanadium 50

Similar threads

Journal selection advice for publishing my papers
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Appeal process for Physical Review Letters
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
Other What Should I Do If My Paper's Status Changes Without Notification?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
7K
Is Self-Publication the Solution for a Rejected Paper?
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
Garbage paper makes it through several open-access journals
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Submit Paper After Rejection: Other Options?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Appealing arXiv moderators decisions
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K
What's the Process for Publishing Scientific Papers?
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
14K
Publishing in free access journal v paid journal?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Where Can I Submit My Physics Paper with Negative Results?
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K