In the academic realm, it may often appear that a paper actually has everything there’s to be: the depth of analysis, the strength of the arguments, a creative theoretical approach. But as practice shows, even the greats can’t always be the best at everything. An academic paper is a significant piece of work that encompasses a spectrum of competencies that vary in each author. When one or a few of those competencies are lacking in a paper, it’s bound to end up in the ‘Rejected’ folder.
There can be many reasons to reject a paper, from basic technical flaws such as the length of the piece or grammatical errors to poor contribution to the field, insufficient arguments, paper’s inconsistency, etc.
When we talk about the editor’s role in assessing and rejecting a journal paper, it’s important to consider several factors that determine whether the paper is worth to be published in an academic journal. These criteria can differ from journal to journal but the most fundamental requirements go as follows:
Although it’s crucial for editors to follow journal guidelines and criteria when reviewing a paper, let’s not forget that the paper assessment process also involves the input gathered during the peer-review stage. Editors’ and peer-reviewers’ work goes hand in hand in efficient management and evaluation of article submissions. Appropriately chosen review management tools can also significantly improve the quality of their efforts by increasing the efficiency of the peer-review process.
One such tool is VTeX EJMS (Electronic Journal Management System) which provides the participants of the paper evaluation process (editors, peer-reviewers, publishers) with a viable web-based environment allowing them to control, manage, track their work and communicate in a time-saving and maximally productive way.
The built-in communication system allows its participants to track the progress of the editing process and thus helps better coordinate their work and responsibilities.