Manuscript Preparation and Writing Standards9

Manuscript Preparation and Writing Standards9

9. Common Author Mistakes and Major Reasons for Manuscript Rejection in Q1/Q2 Journals

Introduction

Publication in Q1 and Q2 journals requires far more than conducting a study and writing a manuscript. Editors and reviewers evaluate submissions according to rigorous scientific, methodological, ethical, and editorial standards. A substantial proportion of manuscripts submitted to high-impact journals are rejected before peer review or during the review process because they fail to meet these expectations.

Understanding the most common reasons for rejection can help authors improve manuscript quality, avoid preventable mistakes, and significantly increase the likelihood of publication.

The purpose of this section is to identify the major weaknesses frequently observed in submitted manuscripts and to provide practical guidance for avoiding them.

1. Lack of Novelty and Scientific Contribution

Why It Leads to Rejection

One of the most common reasons for rejection is the absence of a clear contribution to knowledge.

Editors frequently ask:

• What is new in this study?
• How does this research advance the field?
• Why should readers care about these findings?

If the manuscript merely repeats existing studies without offering new insights, it is unlikely to be considered suitable for publication.

Common Problems

❌ Replicating previous studies without justification.

❌ Addressing an already well-established question.

❌ Producing predictable findings.

❌ Failing to explain the study’s contribution.

❌ Lack of originality in research design.

Best Practice

Authors should explicitly identify:

• The knowledge gap.
• The research problem.
• The innovation of the study.
• The expected contribution.

A reviewer should be able to identify the novelty of the study within the Introduction and Discussion sections.

2. Weak Research Questions and Objectives

Why It Leads to Rejection

Research questions form the foundation of the entire study.

Poorly formulated objectives create problems throughout the manuscript.

Common Problems

❌ Objectives are vague.

❌ Research questions are unclear.

❌ Objectives do not align with methods.

❌ Research questions cannot be answered by the collected data.

Example

Weak:

This study examines environmental issues.

Strong:

This study investigates the influence of urban green infrastructure on community resilience to climate-related hazards.

Best Practice

Research questions should be:

• Specific
• Relevant
• Measurable
• Scientifically meaningful
• Clearly connected to the literature gap

3. Inadequate Literature Review

Why It Leads to Rejection

The literature review demonstrates the author’s understanding of the field.

A weak review signals insufficient scholarly preparation.

Common Problems

❌ Reliance on outdated sources.

❌ Excessive use of secondary citations.

❌ Lack of critical analysis.

❌ Listing studies without synthesis.

❌ Failure to identify research gaps.

❌ Ignoring influential recent publications.

Best Practice

An effective literature review should:

• Focus on recent high-quality sources.
• Critically evaluate previous findings.
• Identify contradictions and gaps.
• Establish the rationale for the study.

4. Methodological Weaknesses

Why It Leads to Rejection

Methodological flaws are among the most serious reasons for rejection.

Even an important research question cannot compensate for poor methodology.

Common Problems

Research Design Problems

❌ Inappropriate research design.

❌ Lack of justification for methodological choices.

Sampling Problems

❌ Small sample size.

❌ Non-representative sampling.

❌ Unclear sampling procedures.

Measurement Problems

❌ Invalid instruments.

❌ Poor reliability.

❌ Insufficient description of measures.

Data Analysis Problems

❌ Incorrect statistical methods.

❌ Violated assumptions.

❌ Incomplete analytical procedures.

Best Practice

Authors should ensure that:

• Methods match objectives.
• Sample size is justified.
• Instruments are validated.
• Analytical procedures are appropriate.
• Methodology is transparent and reproducible.

5. Insufficient Statistical Rigor

Why It Leads to Rejection

Many manuscripts are rejected because statistical analyses are inappropriate or poorly reported.

Common Problems

❌ Reporting only p-values.

❌ Ignoring effect sizes.

❌ Missing confidence intervals.

❌ Inappropriate statistical tests.

❌ Overinterpretation of statistical significance.

❌ Lack of robustness testing.

Best Practice

Authors should report:

• Test statistics
• Degrees of freedom
• P-values
• Effect sizes
• Confidence intervals
• Model diagnostics

Whenever applicable.

6. Poor Presentation of Results

Why It Leads to Rejection

Even strong data can lose impact if findings are poorly organized.

Common Problems

❌ Disorganized presentation.

❌ Excessive raw data.

❌ Redundant tables and figures.

❌ Missing figure references.

❌ Interpretation within the Results section.

Best Practice

Results should be:

• Logical
• Concise
• Clearly structured
• Directly related to objectives

Tables and figures should enhance understanding rather than duplicate information.

7. Weak Discussion Section

Why It Leads to Rejection

Reviewers often evaluate the intellectual quality of a manuscript through its Discussion section.

Common Problems

❌ Repeating results.

❌ Lack of interpretation.

❌ No comparison with previous studies.

❌ Failure to explain significance.

❌ No discussion of implications.

❌ No theoretical contribution.

Best Practice

The Discussion should:

• Interpret findings critically.
• Relate findings to literature.
• Highlight contributions.
• Discuss implications.
• Address limitations.

8. Unsupported Conclusions

Why It Leads to Rejection

Conclusions must be supported by evidence.

Common Problems

❌ Exaggerated claims.

❌ Generalizations beyond the data.

❌ Claims of causality without appropriate design.

❌ Conclusions inconsistent with findings.

Best Practice

Conclusions should remain firmly grounded in the study’s evidence.

9. Ethical Violations

Why It Leads to Immediate Rejection

Ethical concerns are among the most serious issues in scholarly publishing.

Common Violations

Plagiarism

Copying text, ideas, or figures without proper attribution.

Self-Plagiarism

Reusing previously published material without disclosure.

Data Fabrication

Inventing data.

Data Falsification

Manipulating findings.

Duplicate Submission

Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously.

Authorship Misconduct

Including authors who did not contribute or excluding those who did.

Best Practice

Authors should comply fully with international publication ethics standards and maintain complete transparency.

10. Poor Academic Writing

Why It Leads to Rejection

Even scientifically strong manuscripts may be rejected if they are poorly written.

Common Problems

❌ Grammatical errors.

❌ Unclear language.

❌ Ambiguous statements.

❌ Excessive jargon.

❌ Inconsistent terminology.

❌ Poor organization.

Best Practice

Writing should be:

• Precise
• Clear
• Formal
• Consistent
• Scientifically rigorous

Professional language editing may be appropriate when necessary.

11. Failure to Follow Journal Guidelines

Why It Leads to Desk Rejection

Many manuscripts are rejected before peer review because authors ignore submission requirements.

Common Problems

❌ Incorrect formatting.

❌ Missing sections.

❌ Incorrect reference style.

❌ Excessive word count.

❌ Incomplete author information.

❌ Missing ethical declarations.

Best Practice

Authors should carefully review all author guidelines before submission.

12. Weak Alignment with Journal Scope

Why It Leads to Rejection

A manuscript may be scientifically sound yet unsuitable for a particular journal.

Common Problems

❌ Topic falls outside journal scope.

❌ Limited relevance to readership.

❌ Inadequate disciplinary alignment.

Best Practice

Before submission, authors should evaluate:

• Journal aims and scope.
• Recently published articles.
• Target audience.
• Editorial priorities.

13. Insufficient International Relevance

Why It Leads to Rejection

Q1 and Q2 journals typically seek studies with broader significance.

Common Problems

❌ Highly localized findings.

❌ No broader implications.

❌ Limited theoretical relevance.

Best Practice

Authors should explain how findings contribute beyond the immediate study context.

14. Weak Data Transparency and Reproducibility

Why It Leads to Rejection

Research transparency has become a major priority in contemporary publishing.

Common Problems

❌ Inaccessible data.

❌ Incomplete methodology.

❌ Missing analytical details.

❌ Lack of reproducibility.

Best Practice

Provide sufficient information to allow independent verification of the study.

Major Reasons for Desk Rejection

The most common reasons manuscripts are rejected before peer review include:

✓ Lack of novelty.

✓ Poor fit with journal scope.

✓ Weak English language quality.

✓ Failure to follow author guidelines.

✓ Insufficient methodological rigor.

✓ Ethical concerns.

✓ Incomplete submission materials.

Characteristics of Manuscripts Accepted by Q1/Q2 Journals

Successful manuscripts generally demonstrate:

✓ Originality.

✓ Scientific significance.

✓ Methodological rigor.

✓ Strong theoretical foundation.

✓ High-quality data.

✓ Transparent reporting.

✓ Clear academic writing.

✓ International relevance.

✓ Ethical integrity.

✓ Alignment with journal objectives.

Pre-Submission Self-Assessment Checklist

Before submission, authors should ask:

Research Quality

□ Is the study novel?

□ Does it address a meaningful problem?

□ Is the contribution clearly stated?

Methodology

□ Is the design appropriate?

□ Are methods transparent?

□ Are analyses valid?

Writing

□ Is the manuscript clearly written?

□ Is the structure logical?

□ Is terminology consistent?

Ethics

□ Are all ethical requirements satisfied?

□ Are all sources properly cited?

Journal Fit

□ Does the manuscript match the journal scope?

□ Have all author guidelines been followed?

If every item can be answered positively, the manuscript is considerably more likely to progress successfully through peer review.

Final Recommendation

Most manuscript rejections are not caused by a single major flaw but by the accumulation of multiple smaller weaknesses. Authors who systematically address issues related to originality, methodology, writing quality, ethical integrity, and journal fit substantially improve their chances of publication in reputable Q1 and Q2 journals.