Five mistakes to avoid while submitting a research article to the scholarly journal
My colleagues, students and young researchers ask me about research methodology related questions, appropriate tools to use in a research paper or how to choose the right journal to submit the scholarly article so that the research papers receive an acceptance from the journal. However, I am still learning the rules of the game and thought of sharing the mistakes, that I did a few years ago which you can avoid while submitting a research article. The following errors are a big ‘no-no’ when you plan to submit your research paper.
1. Not following author submission guidelines
The first mistake to avoid is to follow the author submission guideline thoroughly. Quite often, I have noticed authors write a manuscript and sparsely align their article with the journal’s submission policies. It is important to remember that high-quality journals receive a substantial number of research papers; therefore, editors often look for reasons to reject the manuscripts than to accept. Hence, following the author’s submission guidelines at least help in avoiding ‘desk rejections’.
2. Not using professional proof-editing service
It is beneficial to avail a professional proof-editing service before submitting the manuscripts. The publishers also provide these services. For instance, Elsevier has ‘webshop’ which provides professional language editing service. The professional proof-editing may be expensive at times, especially when research work is self-funded, but it is essential to make the manuscript impressive and grammatically error-proof. If you are not a native English speaker, then proof-editing is extremely important. And, editors recommend for proof editing, this helps in avoiding the ‘desk rejection.’ Also, checking the similarity index before submitting the manuscript; in most of the high-quality journals, the similarity index should be between 5–10%. The journals follow — initial quality check followed by the manuscript’s strength to go through the next process.
3. Poorly written cover letters to the editors
The first impression the authors can make about their research work is through the cover letter. The way authors draft the cover letter emphasizing the significance, relevance, empirical and managerial implications make an initial impression about the research work even before the abstract and introduction section of the article. It is good to personalize the cover letter. For instance, if authors have received the rejection and intend to submit it to some other journal then revise the cover letter along with the manuscript (expected!). Use appropriate salutation and prefix when addressing the editor. And, try not to meander around the central idea of the research paper in the cover letter.
4. Unattractive or lengthy paper titles
The title of the research article speaks volumes. The provocative, crisp and precise titles are advisable. I have seen authors being fascinated to use ‘analyzing’, ‘evaluating’, ‘examining’; or overuse of hyphen, colon and inverted commas. Keep the title of your paper interesting, abstract (to build the curiosity) and precise. There is a research article with the title “The asshole” and “An-arrgh-chy: The law and economics of pirate organization.” (I am not making any comments on these titles). Refer to articles for interesting titles. Spend a reasonable amount of time to construct the title of your research paper.
5. Not using journal’s reference articles
As an author, it is ideal to choose the target journal you’re planning to submit. Thoroughly go through the articles of journal’s latest issues. Citing articles from the targeted journal that are relevant to your study is essential. I have seen a lot of researchers putting in an effort in writing a quality manuscript but not being proactive in selecting the journal. In such situations, you may receive a desk rejection with the comment, that your article is a misfit to the journal. It is imperative to choose the journal at the ideation stage so that your research objectives and outcomes are aligned with the journal’s publication requirements. And aligning the research idea and contribution with the journal’s stated scope helps in avoiding the desk rejections.
The above observations are learnings from my personal experience of receiving rejections from various high-quality journals. I hope you find the article useful.
Keep writing; it is a solo journey…!
Happy reading :)
