Extreme Bias: How Rejection Clouds The Eyes of Researchers | The Scholarly Kitchen

" ... What does this survey tell us about the perception of authors? First, I think it indicates that the perceived competency of editorial boards and their ability to objectively and scientifically evaluate the quality of a manuscript is largely determined by a single accept/reject decision. While corresponding authors should act as partisan supporters of their own work, a perception of unfairness in the editorial and review process weighs heavily on their overall experience. Second, it confirms that the notion of 'scientifically sound' isn’t a quality that can be evaluated objectively with a yes/no decision, but is something that is highly subjective and contextual. For journals that wish to be selective in what they publish, rejection is just part of the process. Unfortunately, many journals send out form letters to rejected authors, conveying a sense that their papers may not be worth the time it takes to write an original correspondence. The rejection rate of the journal is often stated in these form letters, implying that publication is more of a lottery than the result of careful selection ..."