Last updated: April 2026 · 8 min read · Audience: Authors, students, early-career researchers · Reading level: Introductory
Introduction
Acceptance rates vary widely across journals, but the patterns of acceptance are consistent: editors look for fit and rigour, reviewers look for novelty and validity, and copy-editors look for clarity. Most rejected manuscripts have an identifiable, fixable problem at one of these stages.
This page covers the actionable side of acceptance — the parts the author controls — rather than the editorial discretion that sits outside it.
What editors and reviewers evaluate
The decision sequence at most journals runs in three stages, and weakness at any stage causes rejection.
| Stage | Decision-maker | What is evaluated |
|---|---|---|
| Editorial screening | Handling editor | Scope fit, basic quality, ethical compliance |
| Peer review | Two or more reviewers | Methodology, originality, contribution |
| Final decision | Editor-in-chief or handling editor | Reviewer recommendations + journal priorities |
Manuscripts that fail editorial screening are desk-rejected without peer review. The most common reasons are scope mismatch, missing ethical declarations, and severe formatting non-compliance.
Practical guidance
- Match the manuscript to the journal's scope. Read three recent articles to confirm fit before drafting.
- Follow author guidelines literally — word counts, reference style, figure resolution, ethical declarations.
- Make the contribution explicit in the abstract and the cover letter; reviewers should not have to infer it.
- Cite recent and relevant work; reviewers notice when the literature engagement is shallow.
- Have the manuscript read by a colleague outside the immediate research team for clarity.
- Address ethical declarations (conflicts of interest, data availability, IRB approval) in the standard form expected by the journal.
Common reasons for rejection
Other recurring issues: weak literature engagement, missing ethical statements, figure quality below journal standards, and a cover letter that does not state the contribution clearly. Each is small individually, but they compound when several appear in one submission.
Decision guidance
If the manuscript has been rejected once, treat the reviewer comments as substantive. Even rejection decisions usually identify real issues. Revise thoroughly, target a journal with better scope fit, and resubmit. Resubmitting an unrevised manuscript to a different journal is a common mistake; the same issues will surface again.
Example scenarios
Scenario: a master's student preparing a first submission
First submissions are commonly rejected even when the work is sound, because the manuscript has not been adapted from thesis style to journal style. The introduction is too long, the literature review is too broad, and the discussion does not contextualise the contribution. Targeted rewriting before submission improves acceptance odds substantially.
Scenario: a PhD researcher resubmitting after rejection
After a rejection with substantive comments, address each reviewer point separately in a response letter, mark changes in the manuscript, and submit to a different appropriately-scoped journal. The reviewer feedback is one of the few low-cost ways to improve the manuscript; reusing it across submissions is normal.
Scenario: an early-career researcher under deadline
Time pressure tempts authors to skip pre-submission review. This is usually a false economy; a single revision round costs more time than a careful read by one colleague. Two hours of internal review before submission is consistently the highest-leverage step in the timeline.
What to do next
If the manuscript has been drafted and the target journal identified, the next step is the pre-submission checklist: scope fit verified, guidelines followed, ethical declarations complete, references in correct style, figures at required resolution. Authors targeting EP Journals Group venues can submit through the central form, which routes the manuscript to the relevant editorial office.
Frequently asked questions
Related topics across the knowledge centre
Comparison
EP Journals vs Predatory Journals: How to Tell the Difference
A practical comparison helping researchers distinguish legitimate structured open-access publishers, such as EP Journals, from predatory journals that lack genuine peer review, transparent fees, or verifiable editorial governance.
Comparison
Indexed vs Non-Indexed Journals: A Practical Comparison
A practical comparison of indexed and non-indexed journals across multiple indexing tiers, helping authors interpret indexing claims accurately and choose venues whose indexing matches their needs.
Publishing
Low-Cost Research Journals
Low-cost journals span subscription venues with no author fee, diamond open-access journals fully subsidised by institutions, and open-access journals with modest APCs. Verifying credibility matters more than the headline number.
Publishing
How to Publish a Research Paper in Law
A practical, field-specific guide to publishing research in law, covering norms, challenges, the step-by-step process, where to publish, and how to choose between journal types.
Resource
Journals for Students: Where to Publish Early Research
Students are typically best served by open-access journals that maintain transparent peer review, modest article processing charges (APCs), and clearly documented timelines.
Resource
Journals for Multidisciplinary Research
Multidisciplinary work fits journals explicitly oriented toward cross-field research, generalist scientific journals, or specialty journals where the work's primary discipline anchors. The choice depends on which audience the work most needs to reach.
Guide
Avoiding Plagiarism in Academic Research
A clear explanation of what counts as plagiarism in academic research, how to avoid it in practice, and how journals detect and respond to it.
Guide
What is Indexing in Academic Journals?
An overview of how academic indexing operates, the principal categories of indexing services, and the implications of indexing status for authors and journals.
Related reading and next steps
- Submission portal — Submit a manuscript through the central form
- Journals list — Six peer-reviewed journals across disciplines
- How to avoid rejection
- Common reasons papers get rejected
- Peer-reviewed vs not
- High acceptance rate journals
Editorial enquiries
Questions about this guide or about preparing a manuscript for submission may be directed to the editorial office. Where a query relates to a specific journal in the portfolio, please indicate the journal abbreviation in your message.
Email: editor@ep-journals.org