what happens if your thesis is rejected

What to do when your thesis is rejected by the examiners

If you start a blog called ‘The Thesis Whisperer’ I suppose you should expect students to write to you asking for personal help . What has surprised me however is how OFTEN I get emails from students who are upset, confused or just plain pissed off.

Mostly these students are complaining about their supervisors.

I sympathise with these students and at the same time I feel frustrated on their behalf . I know many capable and even brilliant supervisors, but I also know some who are inexperienced and others who fail to recognise their style of dealing with people is a problem. I’ve heard about (but I should stress, rarely meet) supervisors who have habitual ways of doing supervision which are unhelpful, but they can’t (or won’t) change their behaviour.

As Pat Thomson pointed out recently, supervision can be hard . It’s my belief that ALL supervisors should take part in some of the professional development activities their universities offer. But it’s hard to get them to come along. Either they don’t realise these services are there, or worse, they assume that professional development would not be helpful. Sometimes they are right – who hasn’t sat through a boring ‘professional development’ workshop where someone tells you a whole bunch of stuff you know already, and treats you like you are stupid? These workshops are rare in my experience, but you only have to go to one to be put off the genre.

In a minority of cases I suspect the supervisors in question have been getting away with it for so long now they honestly think the way they are doing things is fine and students who have a problem with it are the limpers in the pack who should just leave. Those supervisors are wrong: if you can get INTO a PhD, you should be able to graduate from one.

But I digress.

I’m not complaining about these emails mind – they are unique and valuable insights into the PhD experience and thus grist for my mill. I try my best to give considered and thoughtful responses, but this takes time. I’m a busy person, so often these cries for help lie at the bottom of my inbox for ages until I can find time respond properly. The longer these emails stay there, the more guilty I feel because of the time and effort the person has spent writing it and how distressed they are feeling. Eventually I have to force myself to take what Katherine Firth calls ‘the electronic walk of shame’ to the bottom of my inbox and clear them all out.

Inevitably when I do this, like just now, I emerge really cheesed off.

It’s just occurred to me that I write essentially the same 10 or so emails, with minor variations . The problems of student / supervisor relationships, while diverse, do tend to fall along some familiar lines.

In a recent post responding to the paper Prof Pat Thomson and I wrote on ‘Why do academics blog?’ , John Canning remarked that he blogs, in part as an aide memoire . Call me thick, but I only just realised that this is a useful way to think about something I do already. Many of my blog posts end up being hand outs in my workshops because I’ve recorded my thoughts on a particular problem. My email responses, while personalised, touch on common issues. So from now on, as I can, I am going to blog my responses to letters I get about supervision, so that I can point students at the relevant post as part of my response. The advantage of doing this is bringing more brains to bear on the issue – so I’m hoping you will chip in on the comments .

This particular one concerns poor supervision and failure of process, which led to a student being asked to resubmit their thesis . I’ve slightly edited it to make sure the student cannot be identified. It’s from a student in the creative arts area, but I think there’s lessons here for students or supervisors alike.

Dear Dr Inger

It was a pleasure attending your lecture some time ago at [a University in Australia]. I’m one of the few PhD candidates in my department who is doing practice based thesis. I’ve made pieces for exhibition and written about them, which should be fun but, to be frank, it hasn’t been a pleasant Journey.

I submitted my thesis 6 months ago and the result came back 4 weeks ago. One examiner report was positive but the other was completely the opposite. I’ve been told I have to resubmit my thesis.

To make matters worse, my original supervisor has left the university and my current supervisor has no experience with practice based theses. How can I combine my creative works with my written thesis in away that two components seem like they belong together?

There are many grey areas. I’m finding it difficult to get advice, written or otherwise, on how to move my thesis forward and complete. I feel really confused and helpless.

Can you help me?

A Sad Student.

This is what I wrote:

Dear Sad Student,

I feel your pain – it’s an incredibly difficult thing to do a practice based thesis, as I know from experience. I’m not sure how I can really help as the answer to your question is dependant on the work you have done, but here are some things to think about:

1) Think about the thesis as a document for fellow professionals in your discipline. The over riding mission is to show them what others can learn from what you have done. This may be insights into practice itself, materials, culture – whatever.

2) Really look at your writing. How clear is it? In my experience, much of the way we are taught to write in creative disciplines is wrong. Your writing style (if you were taught the way I was) might be either too simplistic or too obscure. Perhaps both. This is not your fault. You are immersed in a culture that, on the whole, approaches academic writing in an ad hoc way. It’s totally fixable, but will take some work. Seek help from your academic skills unit. I learned much from books, such as ‘Helping doctoral students write’ by Kamler and Thomson (Pat runs the excellent ‘Patter’ blog ) and ‘Style: 10 lessons in clarity and grace’ by Joseph Williams. There’s other great blogs out there, like Explorations in Style, Research Degree Voodoo , Lit Review HQ and Doctoral writing SIG , which have tips too. Subscribe to them.

3) INSIST on proper supervision from your department. In your circumstance it’s not enough to give you a supervisor who ‘doesn’t understand’ a practice based thesis. If you are not satisfied with what your department says, take it to the next level. If there’s a graduate school, escalate your complaint to them. They can probably help you arrange another supervisor from another university if necessary. Become the proverbial squeaky wheel. If processes were working properly you should never have found yourself in this situation. Problems with theses should be picked up in a final presentation and examiners should be chosen with due care.

4) Sometimes the problems occur in creative research examinations because the student was never properly guided through the nature of knowledge making in creative disciplines. This is a contested and contestable field. I’ve attached a PDF by Linda Candy called “Practice based research: a guide” which might help sort some of these things out in your mind. There are other books and many different points of view

All the best,

Well, that’s my response – have you suffered this problem? What did you do? How about the excellent supervisors who read the Thesis Whisperer? Would you have offered similar or different advice to me?

Whisper to me....

Enter your email address to get posts by email.

Email Address

Sign me up!

On the reg: a podcast with @jasondowns
Thesis Whisperer on Facebook
Thesis Whisperer on Instagram
Thesis Whisperer on Soundcloud
Thesis Whisperer on Youtube
Thesiswhisperer on Mastodon
Thesiswhisperer page on LinkedIn
Thesiswhisperer Podcast
12,057,028 hits

Discover more from The Thesis Whisperer

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

My paper has been rejected without review. What do I do now?

Questions and Quandaries
Published: 04 May 2023
Volume 28 , pages 323–326, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

Jennifer Cleland 1 ,
Patricia O’Sullivan 2 &
Ayelet Kuper 3

458 Accesses

2 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

This column is intended to address the kinds of knotty problems and dilemmas with which many scholars grapple in studying health professions education. In this article, the authors address the question of why papers may be desk rejected (rejected without going out for formal peer review) and describe simple steps for authors to optimize their work so it gets past the desk reject stage.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Cleland, J.A., & Durning, S. (2023). Researching Medical Education (2nd Edition). Wiley: Oxford.

Hansen, A., Engel-Hills, P., Jacobs, C. et al. (2023) Understandings and practices: Towards socially responsive curricula for the health professions. Adv Health Sci Educ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-023-10207-0

Article Google Scholar

Gesing, P., Pant, M. D., & Burbage, A. K. (2022) Health occupations salary outcomes: Intersections of student race, gender, and first-generation status. Adv Health Sci Educ 28(1):223–241.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore

Jennifer Cleland

University of California San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA, USA

Patricia O’Sullivan

Wilson Centre for Research in Education, Division of General Internal Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Department of Medicine, University Health Network, University of Toronto, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

Ayelet Kuper

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jennifer Cleland .

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cleland, J., O’Sullivan, P. & Kuper, A. My paper has been rejected without review. What do I do now?. Adv in Health Sci Educ 28 , 323–326 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-023-10234-x

Download citation

Accepted : 20 April 2023

Published : 04 May 2023

Issue Date : May 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-023-10234-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

View the latest institution tables

View the latest country/territory tables

6 ways to deal with rejection

Rejection in academia seems particularly personal, but it doesn't have to be.

Staci Zavattaro

Credit: Gary Waters/Getty Images

31 July 2019

Gary Waters/Getty Images

I just graduated from my doctoral program and was attending my discipline’s annual conference. That week, I had gotten several papers rejected in a row. Back to back. I began to question if this job was even right for me.

So what did I do? Cried in the elevator of course. The doors opened and standing there, oddly enough, was my dissertation chair. He asked what was wrong so I told him.

He basically said, "Oh that’s all?" Looking back now I can see he was right. In the moment I thought, "Well this is totally serious, and he needs to take it as such!"

Rejection is a part of academic life, just as it is part of the corporate world, nonprofit sector, and things we do every single day. Somehow though, rejection in academia seems personal because someone, usually a total stranger, is judging your work.

You might write a course paper that receives a lower grade than you wanted. You might not pass your comprehensive exams on the first try. Your first dissertation proposal surely will have major revisions. Your first article... I could go on, but you see my point.

What helps me cope is to realise rejection is happening to everyone around you, even if they do not tell you.

My colleague Shannon Orr and I edited a book called Reflections on Academic Lives . In it, we start with what we called an ode to rejection because, believe it or not, rejection can actually be a positive thing if you let it.

In that volume, we have 70 academics of all levels – from doctoral students to a retired provost – giving their best advice for surviving academia (or removing yourself from it).

One reflection that is pertinent here comes from Steven R. Shaw from McGill University . Some of you might know him as @Shawpsych on Twitter . In our book, Steven writes about the 'shadow CV,' meaning what you do not see is all the failure behind the success.

That article? You do not see that it was rejected three times before. The grants? You do not see the countless rejections and revisions each went through. His message is to look beyond the success to see the silver lining in rejections.

Here I share with you some advice that has helped me cope with rejection. This list is not exhaustive, and some of the things might not work for you. I would be thrilled to hear other tips and tricks you have learned that can also support me with continued rejection.

1. Put it away – Rejection often hits hard. It feels like the journal or the grant agency is rejecting us. Really they are rejecting the version of the work they got on that day. Put the reviews away until you are in a better mental space to look at them.

Chances are there is some feedback in there that will be meaningful as you progress with the project. Your task is to find those nuggets and build from there.

2. Everyone gets rejected – For me, I never think senior scholars still face rejection. I imagine that when 'Big Name Scholar' sends a paper to a journal, he or she gets their work accepted with no question. Whenever I speak with senior scholars, they always laugh and tell me that of course they get rejected. And each time it somehow blows my mind.

But this is important for everyone to hear because it tells me that rejection happens all throughout your career, so you better develop a thick skin.

3. Speaking of a thick skin – You really do need one. And I say this as someone who is incredibly sensitive. I told you I was crying in an elevator! I have been an academic for almost a decade now, and this is a skill I need to practice every single time a rejection comes in. I need to stop, breathe, and remember it is not about me.

I tell my students now that rejection does not bother me as much, and they look at my strangely. Notice I said as much. Because when it stops bothering me totally that means I have given up and do not care.

4. See rejection as a learning opportunity – From each rejection comes a silver lining – if you let it. Remember above I told you my friend Shannon and I edited a book on surviving academia? Well, we met thanks to rejection. I applied for a position at her university. I received a campus interview, and she was so lovely to me.

I did not get the job (which is probably a good thing because she is in Ohio, and I am a Florida girl through and through, so that means snow and I do not mix), but we stayed in touch throughout the years. I posted on Facebook about changing my doctoral course, and I asked for feedback from friends.

I got so much that I wondered if maybe there was something more to this. Shannon messaged me literally the next day and said, “I think there is something here.” So we put together a book proposal, and the rest, as they say, is history.

5. Ask for help – Do not be afraid to ask others for feedback or input. Sometimes we are afraid of normalizing rejection in academia. We want to appear as all-knowing sages immune to failure. That simply is not true. For anyone.

So if you are not sure how to handle rejection, talk to someone. Colleagues have all been through it so they can lend an ear. Talk to friends. All I am suggesting is that you do not hold in rejection, because perhaps from talking comes a partnership you did not expect, or an idea you never would have had prior.

6. Have fun – Sometimes in academia we like to have a "busy competition." You know that game. It is where everyone tries to out-busy the other. People compare projects they worked on during spring break. Or brag about getting no sleep so they can push out a grant proposal. I hate it. I really do.

Because the reality is, we are all busy. Instead I tell my students and colleagues to go have fun. Clear your mind. Do something you love. Really, it does not matter what. Just do it. Your work will be there when you get back.

I do encourage all of you to normalize rejection in your classrooms.

Be open with your students about this omnipresent academic reality. I like to walk my students through the ways in which I revised a paper. I also tell them when I had to simply let a project languish. It is okay to admit that something did not work out the first time. Or even the second time.

I know I am getting better at handling rejection because I no longer cry in elevators.

Staci M. Zavattaro , PhD, is an associate professor of public administration and a research associate with the Center for Public and Nonprofit Management at the University of Central Florida. She serves as editor-in-chief of the international journal Administrative Theory & Praxis.

This article was originally published on the LSE Blog . Read the original article .

Here’s how to deal with failure, say senior scientists

Q&A Wendy Belcher: How to write a journal article in 12 weeks

Q&A Niamh Brennan: 100 rules for publishing in top journals

Writing A Research Proposal

8 common (and costly) mistakes to avoid 🤦.

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) & David Phair (PhD) . Reviewed By: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | June 2021

At Grad Coach, we review a lot of research proposals , including dissertation proposals and thesis proposals. Some are pretty good, while others are, well, not fantastic. Sadly, many students only approach us after their proposal has been rejected , meaning they’ve wasted a lot of time and effort.

We’ll look at 8 common mistakes and issues we see cropping up in research proposals so that you can craft your proposal with confidence and maximise the chances of it being approved.

Dissertation and thesis research proposal mistakes

Overview: 8 Research Proposal Killers

The research topic is too broad (or just poorly articulated).
The research aims, objectives and questions don’t align .
The research topic is not well justified .
The study has a weak theoretical foundation .
The research design is not well articulated well enough.
Poor writing and sloppy presentation.
Poor project planning and risk management.
Not following the university’s specific criteria .

#1: The research topic is too broad.

One of the most common issues we see in dissertation and thesis proposals is that the research topic is simply too broad . In other words, the focus of the research is not ringfenced tightly enough (or just not defined clearly enough), resulting in a proposal that has an unclear direction or attempts to take on too much.

For example, a research project that aims to “investigate trust in the workplace” would be considered very broad. This topic has no specific focus and leaves many questions unanswered, for example:

What type(s) of trust?
Between whom?
Within what types of workplaces?
Within what industry or industries?

As a general rule of thumb, you should aim for a fairly narrow focus when you craft your research topic. Doing this will allow you to go deep and investigate the topic in-depth , which is what the markers want to see. Quality beats quantity – or rather, depth beats breadth – when it comes to defining and refining your research topic.

A related problem is that oftentimes, students have a more refined topic within their mind, but they don’t articulate it well in their proposal. This often results in the proposal being rejected because the topic is perceived as being too broad. In other words, it’s important to ensure you not only have a clear, sharp focus for your research, but that you communicate that well in your dissertation or thesis proposal. Make sure that you address the who , what , were and when, so that your topic is well defined.

Let’s look at an example.

Sticking with the topic I mentioned earlier, a more refined and well-articulated research aim could be something along the lines of:

“To investigate the factors that cultivate organisational trust (i.e. a customer trusting an organisation) within the UK life insurance industry.”

As you can see, this is a lot more specific and ringfences the topic into a more manageable scope . So, when it comes to your research topic, remember to keep it tight .

In your proposal, make sure that you address the who, what, where and when, so that your topic is well-defined.

#2: The research aims, objectives and questions don’t align.

Another common issue that we see with weaker research proposals is misalignment between the research aims and objectives , as well as with the research questions . Sometimes all three are misaligned , and sometimes there’s only one misfit. Whatever the case, it’s a problem that can lead to proposal rejection, as these three elements need to link together tightly.

Let’s look at an example of a misaligned trio.

Research Aim:

To identify factors that cultivate organisational trust in British insurance brokers.

Research Objectives:

To measure organisational trust levels across different demographic groups within the UK.

To investigate the causes of differences in organisational trust levels between groups.

Research Question:

What factors influence organisational trust between customers and insurance brokers within the UK?

As you can see, the research aim and research question are reasonably aligned (they are both focused on the factors that cultivate trust). However, the research objectives are misaligned, as they focus on measuring trust levels across different groups, rather than identifying what factors stimulate trust. This will result in a study that’s pulling in different directions – not good.

A related issue we see is that students don’t really understand the difference between research aims (the broader goal), research objectives (how you’ll achieve that goal) and research questions (the specific questions you’ll answer within your study). So, when you’re preparing your proposal, make sure that you clearly understand how these differ and make sure they’re all tightly aligned with each other.

Free Webinar: How To Write A Research Proposal

#3: The research topic is not well justified.

A good research topic – in other words, a good set of research aims, research objectives and research questions – needs to be well justified to convince your university to approve your research. Poor justification of the research topic is a common reason for proposals to be rejected.

So, how do you justify your research?

For a research topic to be well justified, you need to demonstrate both originality and importance .

Originality means that your proposed research is novel , or at least that it’s novel within its context (for example, within a specific country or industry). While the extent of this novelty will vary depending on your institution, programme and level of study (e.g. Masters vs Doctorate), your research will always need to have some level of originality. In other words, you can’t research something that’s been researched ad nauseam before.

Simply put, your research needs to emerge from a gap in the existing literature . To do this, you need to figure out what’s missing from the current body of knowledge (by undertaking a review of the literature) and carve out your own research to fill that gap. We explain this process in more detail here .

Importance is the second factor. Just because a topic is unique doesn’t mean it’s important . You need to be able to explain what the benefits of undertaking your proposed research would be. Who would benefit? How would they benefit? How could the newly developed knowledge be used in the world, whether in academia or industry?

So, when you’re writing up your research proposal, make sure that you clearly articulate both the originality and importance of your proposed research, or you’ll risk submitting an unconvincing proposal.

You have to justify every choice in your dissertation defence

#4: The study has a weak theoretical foundation.

As I mentioned in the previous point, your research topic needs to emerge from the existing research . In other words, your research needs to fill a clear gap in the literature – something that hasn’t been adequately researched, or that lacks research in a specific context.

To convince your university that your topic will fill a gap in the research, your proposal needs to have a strong theoretical foundation . In other words, you need to show that you’ve done the necessary reading and are familiar with the existing research. To do this, you need to provide an integrated summary of the existing research and highlight (very clearly) the theoretical gap that exists.

Some common signs of a weak theoretical foundation that we’ve encountered include:

A general lack of sources and a reliance on personal opinion and anecdotes, rather than academic literature.
Failing to acknowledge and discuss landmark studies and key literature in the topic area.
Relying heavily on low-quality sources , such as blog posts, personal websites, opinion pieces, etc.
Relying heavily on outdated sources and not incorporating more recent research that builds on the “classics”.

While it’s generally not expected that you undertake a comprehensive literature review at the proposal stage, you do still need to justify your topic by demonstrating a need for your study (i.e. the literature gap). So, make sure that you put in the time to develop a sound understanding of the current state of knowledge in your space, and make sure that you communicate that understanding in your proposal by building your topic justification on a solid base of credible literature.

#5: The research design is not articulated well enough (or is just impractical).

Once you’ve made a strong argument regarding the value of your research (i.e., you’ve justified it), the next matter that your research proposal needs to address is the “how” – in other words, your intended research design and methodology .

A common issue we see is that students don’t provide enough detail in this section. This is often because they don’t really know exactly what they’re going to do and plan to just “figure it out later” (which is not good enough). But sometimes it’s just a case of poor articulation – in other words, they have a clear design worked out in their minds, but they haven’t put their plan to paper.

Whatever the reason, a dissertation or thesis proposal that lacks detail regarding the research design runs a major risk of being rejected. This is because universities want to see that you have a clearly defined, practical plan to achieve your research aims and objectives and answer your research questions.

At a minimum, you should provide detail regarding the following:

Research philosophy – the set of beliefs your research is based on (positivism, interpretivism, pragmatism)
Research approach – the broader method you’ll use (inductive, deductive, qualitative and quantitative)
Research strategy – how you’ll conduct the research (e.g., experimental, action, case study, etc.)
Time horizon – the number of points in time at which you’ll collect your data (e.g. cross-sectional or longitudinal)
Techniques and procedures – your intended data collection methods, data analysis techniques, sampling strategies , etc.

For more information about each of these design decisions, check out our post detailing the Research Onion.

Of course, your research design can (and most likely will) evolve along the way , but you still need a starting point. Also, your proposed research design needs to be practical, given your constraints. A brilliant design is pointless if you don’t have the resources (e.g. money, equipment, expertise, etc.) to pull it off. So, get detailed in this section of your proposal and keep it realistic to maximise your chances of approval.

Need a helping hand?

#6: Poor writing and sloppy presentation.

As with any document, poor writing and sloppy presentation can heavily detract from your research proposal, even if you tick all the other boxes. While poor writing and presentation alone probably won’t result in your proposal being rejected, it will definitely put you at a disadvantage , as it gives a negative impression regarding the overall quality of your work.

The main issues we see here are:

Directionless or scattered writing – for example, writing that jumps from one point to another with poor flow and connectivity, disjointed points, etc.
Poor argument formation – for example, a lack of premises and conclusions, disconnected conclusions and poor reasoning (you can learn more about argument development here ).
Inappropriate language – for example, using a very informal or casual tone, slang, etc).
Grammar and spelling issues, as well as inconsistent use of UK/US English.
Referencing issues – for example, a lack of references or incorrectly formatted references.
Table and figure captions – for example, a lack of captions, citations, figure and table numbers, etc.
Low-quality visuals and diagrams.

The good news is that many of these can be resolved by editing and proofreading your proposal beforehand, so it’s always a good idea to take the time to do this. It’s also a good idea to ask a friend to review your document, as you will invariably suffer from blindspots when editing your own work. If your budget allows, having your work reviewed by an academic editor will ensure you cover all bases and submit a high-quality document.

#7: Poor project planning and risk management.

While different universities will have varying requirements, there is usually a requirement (or at least an expectation) for a project plan of sorts. As I mentioned earlier, a strong research proposal needs to be practical and manageable, given your constraints. Therefore, a well-articulated project plan that considers all the practicalities (and risks) is an important part of a strong research proposal.

We generally recommend that students draw up a fairly detailed Gantt chart , detailing each major task involved in the dissertation writing process. For example, you can break it down into the various chapters ( introduction , literature review, etc.) and the key tasks involved in completing each chapter (research, planning, writing, etc). What’s most important here is to be realistic – things almost always take longer than you expect, especially if you’re a first-time researcher.

We also recommend including some sort of risk management plan . For this, you could make use of a basic risk register , listing all the potential risks you foresee, as well as your mitigation and response actions, should they occur. For example, the risk of data collection taking longer than anticipated, the risk of not getting enough survey responses , etc.

What’s most important is to demonstrate that you have thought your research through and have a clear plan of action . Of course, as with your research design, plans can (and likely will) change – and that’s okay. However, you still need to have an initial plan, and that plan needs to be realistic and manageable, or you’ll risk your proposal getting rejected.

#8: Not following the university’s specific criteria.

While research proposals are fairly generic in terms of contents and style, and tend to follow a reasonably standardised structure, each university has its nuances in terms of what they want to be included in the dissertation or thesis proposal.

Some universities want more or less detail in certain sections, some want extra sections, and some want a very specific structure and format (down to the font type and size!). So, you need to pay very close attention to whatever institution-specific criteria your university has set out.

Typically, your university will provide some sort of brief or guidance document to direct your proposal efforts, so be sure to study this document thoroughly and ask the faculty for clarity if you’re uncertain about anything. Some universities will also provide a proposal template . Pay careful attention to any specific structure they recommend as well as formatting requirements (such as font, line spacing, margin sizes, referencing format, etc.).

If your university provides an assessment criteria matrix , you’ve hit the jackpot, as that document will detail exactly what you need to achieve in each section of the proposal. Study that matrix inside out and make sure that your research proposal tightly aligns with the assessment criteria.

Recap: 8 Research Proposal Mistakes

We’ve covered a lot here – let’s recap on the 8 common mistakes that can hurt your research proposal or even get it rejected:

The research design is not articulated well enough.
Not following the university’s specific criteria.

If you have any questions about these common mistakes, leave a comment below and we’ll do our best to answer. You may also want to have a look at some examples of successful proposals here . If you’d like to get 1-on-1 help with your research proposal , book a free initial consultation with a friendly coach to discuss how we can move you forward.

Psst… there’s more!

This post is an extract from our bestselling Udemy Course, Research Proposal Bootcamp . If you want to work smart, you don't want to miss this .

You Might Also Like:

Thanks a lot for sharing these tips, very usefull and help me a lot, Many thanks

I just want to express my sincere gratitude for everything you guys are doing. You held my hand when I was doing my dissertation. I successfully completed it and got good marks. I just got myself reviewing this so I could help others struggling. May God bless you. May he bless you abundantly.

Thank you so much, I got it very important, and your presentation is also very attractive.

I find the text very educative. I am just preparing to start work on my PhD thesis. I must admit that I have learnt so much about how to organize myself for the task ahead of me. Thank you so much for being there to support people like me.

I found this video highly educative, it gave me a full glance at what is ahead of me – starting my Ph.D. now! Thank you for these amazing facts.

Thanks a lot for such an insightful video and explanation on Research Proposal design. I’m a beginner and pursuing my B.ed , these tips are really helpful to get a good start.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Print Friendly

Your Paper Was Rejected after Review - What Next?

Research Process

Every researcher experiences rejection from journals at some point. A few options after desk rejection include appealing the decision, resubmitting, or finding a new journal. Research data is valuable and should be published somewhere.

Updated on January 1, 2014

a researcher after getting desk rejected

Scientific publication is an iterative process. Manuscripts are written, revised, and edited several times. Authors gather input from collaborators, colleagues, and peer reviewers. In a perfect world, this carefully crafted final product would be immediately ready to share. Still, evidence suggests that 20% of papers are rejected without review , and approximately 40% of papers are rejected after peer review (see our companion article on time spent in the peer review process ).

Given that rejection is inevitable, even for Nobel laureates , researchers should focus not on avoiding rejection but on what their options are after rejection . Every authors has a number of options after a manuscript is rejected by a journal. As noted above, some rejections occur before the paper is sent for review. In such cases, remember that your time is important. Find a new journal that fits your work and move on. If you have received reviews of your manuscript, that information is very valuable. Even if that journal will not publish the material, you now have ideas for ways to improve the paper.

Here are the most common options for next steps after rejection:

1. appeal the rejection.

The journal should have a publicly described policy for appealing editorial decisions . Appealing a rejection is within your rights as an author, but base your appeal on logic and not emotion. If a legitimate misunderstanding or error led the reviewers to recommend rejection, outline your points to the editor without belittling the reviewers or being argumentative. Appeals based on the scope of the journal or the perceived impact of your work are unlikely to succeed.

2. Resubmit to the same journal

The journal may reject your initial offering but invite you to resubmit later after addressing the reviewers' concerns. If you are strongly interested in publishing in that journal, this option may be your top choice. Remember that some journals will inform you that they are not interested in accepting any future versions of the manuscript; you should respect this decision and try a different journal.

3. Make changes and submit to a different journal

The third option is by far the most common. Carefully consider the comments you received from the reviewers, work to improve your manuscript, and submit the manuscript to another journal. Be sure to adjust details like the cover letter , reference format , and other journal-specified details before resubmission.

4. Make no changes and submit to another journal

While this option is very easy, it's not a good idea. By refusing to acknowledge any of the changes that the first set of reviewers suggested, you are basically negating all the effort expended in that first round of review. Chances are that some of the suggestions would improve your manuscript, even if some were mistaken. New reviewers are likely to pick up on several of the same issues; you now have a chance to address them ahead of time. And on a more practical note, your manuscript may actually be reviewed by some of the same people at a new journal. If you haven't made any efforts to change the paper, be assured that their recommendation will not change!

5. File the manuscript away and never resubmit it

It can be easy to decide that your paper simply isn't worth the trouble of resubmission. Still, while it is easy to let a paper go, it's not best for the research community. Your data might be very valuable to someone else, either to provide the missing piece to a puzzle or to head off fruitless avenues of research. As hard as it is to believe in these days of complete media saturation, scholarly publishing may yet suffer from publishing too little , not too much. If you don't want to argue for your article's "fit" to a particular journal, consider PLOS ONE or PeerJ if you're in the biomedical sciences. Finally, you can post your work to a site like figshare or Dryad , where it will be citable and freely accessible.

This is not an exhaustive list of options following rejection, but it covers the most common responses. Did we miss any? Do you have any other thoughts about resubmission of a manuscript? Write to [email protected] . Best of luck with publishing your work!

Ben Mudrak, Senior Product Manager at American Chemical Society/ChemRxiv, PhD, Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, Duke University

Ben Mudrak, PhD

See our "Privacy Policy"

Desk rejected?

Let our experts choose the best journals to submit your research. Select our Journal Recommendation service to avoid desk rejection.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
J Obstet Gynaecol India
v.68(4); 2018 Aug

Rejection Blues: Why Do Research Papers Get Rejected?

Suvarna satish khadilkar.

Consultant Gyne-Endocrinologist, Bombay Hospital & Medical Research Centre, 12 New Marine Line, Mumbai, 400020 India

It is really disheartening when your paper gets rejected by a journal. Authors work very hard to conduct research. They present their work in the form of platform presentation in a conference and/or as a research article for publication. When their platform presentations get applauded by the audience, researchers feel encouraged to publish it. However, it may not be appreciated by editors and reviewers when the research is submitted to a journal for publication. One should not get disappointed by rejections. Most top journals have almost 80% rejection rates. This editorial will take a brief review of reasons for rejection and advise how to deal with rejections.

Introduction

If you wish to publish good-quality articles and have faced rejections, this editorial will help you understand common reasons for rejection so that you may rectify the deficiencies before you submit your work. You stand a better chance of acceptance if due care is taken while preparing your manuscript. One question keeps disturbing authors of rejected papers: “If I have done a useful study and have written to the perfection and to my satisfaction, why did the editors and reviewers reject my paper?” Contrary to belief, editors don’t like to reject papers. Every time I reject a paper, I appreciate the efforts that have gone in the preparation, but I also ask myself “Am I doing justice to the readers worldwide, who take out time to read our journal to learn something new to improvise the way they practice? Don’t the readers deserve the best of the best research for updating their knowledge? Do they deserve the same old findings well established several times in the literature? The answer is certainly ‘No’! One must remember that world’s best revolutionary trials and path-breaking research are submitted to these prestigious journals; hence, a paper of a lower quality and priority is most likely to be rejected.

Why Do Papers Get Rejected?

Let us look at the various reasons as to why the articles get rejected. After submission the article goes through an arduous journey. Readers are requested to read our first article of editorial series on medical writing in this journal [ 1 ]. The journey of the article is clearly described. At every phase of this journey, errors and deficiencies may be encountered by editors, reviewers and also the technical team. These may or may not sustain the strict scrutiny done by the board.

First hurdle is the technical scrutiny! Authors need to comply with all the requirements of the journal and submit all the supporting documents that are necessary.

Editors initially look at the title and the subject on which the research has been based. When it is not of much interest to the readership, the paper can be directly rejected at the level of editorial discussion. Such a paper may not be sent for peer review. There are many reasons why the paper will be rejected without a detailed peer reviewers’ analysis.

The paper and the subject may be out of scope and not suitable for the journal and readership
Weak hypothesis
Too basic research
Poor methodology, small sample size, poor statistical analysis
Discrepancy of authors and institutes
Conflict of interest not declared; ethical committee permission not taken
Informed consent of subjects not taken
Single case reports not making a useful point (usually banking on rarity)
The target journal may have similar research papers published or already in the process of getting published
Suspected or confirmed plagiarism.

Only those papers that withstand the initial editorial scrutiny are then sent for reviewers’ opinion for detailed analysis. This reduces the burden of papers on reviewers. Hence, editors and expert reviewers can focus and give time to do detailed critical analysis of a good-quality paper. Reasons for rejection at this stage are as follows:

Aims do not raise the right kind of questions, and background lacks clarity of thoughts
Data are incomplete, and the methodology section has irreparable deficiencies
Instructions to authors are not followed strictly
Figures are of low resolution, and tables are too complicated and are not comprehendible
Case reports lack proper documentation and follow-up information
Discussion and conclusions do not answer the question posed in aims and objective
There is a mismatch between the statements made in different sections of papers
On reviewing the manuscript editors/reviewers feel that authors have not worked hard enough to improvise the presentation of the data. Authors need to revise and re-revise as many times as required to get the flawless draft of manuscript [ 2 ]
There is an overall lack of key elements of a good research like a strong hypothesis, flawless methodology, a well-presented results and good discussion with recommendations and conclusions
References are not as per journal style
Poor language and many spelling and grammatical mistakes create a bad impression on the reviewers.

These reasons should be considered by authors before preparing a manuscript to reduce their papers’ rejection chances.

Analysis of Reasons for Rejection

We reviewed the reasons for rejection in this journal for the benefit of aspiring authors and readers. An analysis of reasons for rejection of 400 papers submitted to this journal (Fig. 1 ) revealed that poor methodology, no new information, poor scientific content, reported cases not rare enough or of low priority, and similar papers existing in the literature are the top five reasons for the submission having a final disposition of rejection.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is 13224_2018_1153_Fig1_HTML.jpg

Analysis of reasons for rejection

This analysis offers an insight for aspiring authors to come up with a better manuscript. However, a rejection outcome doesn’t always mean a poor manuscript. It could simply be less suited for the readership of the journal and be better suited to a different audience. Hence, it is important to choose the target journal wisely.

Rejection Rates

Rejection rates of various top-tier journals including ours vary between 80 and 85%. Some journals have reported it to be around 90–95% [ 3 – 5 ]. Sometimes restricted publishing space is given as one of the reasons for high rejection rates. But in my opinion, a good-quality research paper will find the space it deserves in top-tier journals. Interestingly, it is reported that 62% of papers have been rejected at least once by other journals before getting published [ 6 ].

Paper Has Been Rejected: What Next?

The first and foremost important step is to keep calm and not be emotional, aggressive or impulsive to write back and appeal in a fit of anger. Once rejected, most journals do not entertain any further correspondence.

Please study the reasons for rejection properly and try to rectify. They involve paper quality as well as journal suitability. It is possible that your paper is suitable for another journal. Search for another journal and submit your article. If your paper is of good quality but not suitable for that target journal, the editor himself may transfer the paper to another journal and your paper may be accepted in that journal. However, if the rejection has happened for the want of further continued research, then re-assess the paper to know if this is possible. If yes, then you need to continue the work and publish it at a later date, needless to say that next time thorough home work must be done about the target journal.

There are no secrets to success. It is the result of preparation, hard work and learning from failure. — Colin Powell

Dr. Mrs. Suvarna Satish Khadilkar

is the Editor-in-chief of this journal. She is currently working as Consultant Gyne-Endocrinologist, Bombay Hospital Institute of Medical Sciences and Medical Research Centre, Mumbai. In the past she worked as Associate Professor and Unit Chief at JJ Group of Hospitals and Grant Medical College [GMC], Mumbai, and thereafter in the capacity of the Professor and Head in Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Government Medical College, Kolhapur, Maharashtra. She has been an undergraduate and postgraduate teacher and examiner, Mumbai University and Maharashtra University of Health Sciences. Pursuing her interest in endocrinology, she acquired Diploma in Endocrinology from the prestigious University of South Wales, UK, and has been appointed as a recognized teacher in endocrinology in University of South Wales. She is the Treasurer of FOGSI. She has held many prestigious positions like President of Indian Menopause Society, Chairperson of Reproductive Endocrinology Committee of FOGSI, President, Association of Medical Women in India, Mumbai. She is currently the librarian of Mumbai Ob–Gyn Society. She has published six text books and more than 70 articles at national and international levels. She is recipient of 30 awards for her research work including the Young Scientist Award.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is 13224_2018_1153_Figa_HTML.jpg

Prof Suvarna Khadilkar MD DGO FICOG, CIMP, Diploma in Endocrinology (UK) is Editor in Chief of Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India, and Treasurer, FOGSI, she is Consultant Gyneendocrinologist, Bombay Hospital & Medical Research Centre, Mumbai, Former Professor and Head, Dept of ObGyn, RCSM, Government Medical College, Maharashtra and Asso. Prof. & Unit Chief Grant Medical College and Cama & Albless hospital, Mumbai.

World leading higher education information and services Home News Blogs Courses Jobs

What to do when your thesis is rejected by the examiners.

| March 5, 2014 | 0 responses

I suppose I should expect students to write asking for personal help . What has surprised me however is how OFTEN I get emails from students who are upset, confused or just plain pissed off.

Mostly these students are complaining about their supervisors.

doris-day-teacher\’s-pet3The rate these emails come in varies, but I would say it averages four a week – and they come from all over the world, not from within my institution. More men write to me than women – perhaps, if my facebook page and comment threads are anything to go by, this is because women find it easier to admit their vulnerabilities in public.

But I digress.

Inevitably when I do this, like just now, I emerge really cheesed off.

It’s just occurred to me that I write essentially the same 10 or so emails , with minor variations. The problems of student / supervisor relationships, while diverse, do tend to fall along some familiar lines.

In a recent post responding to the paper Prof Pat Thomson and I wrote on ‘ Why do academics blog? ’, John Canning remarked that he blogs, in part as an aide memoire . Call me thick, but I only just realised that this is a useful way to think about something I do already. Many of my blog posts end up being hand outs in my workshops because I’ve recorded my thoughts on a particular problem. My email responses, while personalised, touch on common issues. So from now on, as I can, I am going to blog my responses to letters I get about supervision, so that I can point students at the relevant post as part of my response. The advantage of doing this is bringing more brains to bear on the issue – so I’m hoping you will chip in on the comments .

Dear Dr Inger

I submitted my thesis 6 months ago and the result came back 4 weeks ago. One examiner report was positive but the other was completely the opposite. I’ve been told I have to resubmit my thesis.

There are many grey areas. I’m finding it difficult to get advice, written or otherwise, on how to move my thesis forward and complete. I feel really confused and helpless.

Can you help me?

A Sad Student. This is what I wrote:

Dear Sad Student,

2) Really look at your writing. How clear is it? In my experience, much of the way we are taught to write in creative disciplines is wrong. Your writing style (if you were taught the way I was) might be either too simplistic or too obscure. Perhaps both. This is not your fault. You are immersed in a culture that, on the whole, approaches academic writing in an ad hoc way. It’s totally fixable, but will take some work. Seek help from your academic skills unit. I learned much from books, such as ‘ Helping doctoral students write ’ by Kamler and Thomson (Pat runs the excellent ‘Patter’ blog ) and ‘ Style: 10 lessons in clarity and grace’ by Joseph Williams. There’s other great blogs out there, like Explorations in Style, Research Degree Voodoo , Lit Review HQ and Doctoral writing SIG , which have tips too. Subscribe to them.

4) Sometimes the problems occur in creative research examinations because the student was never properly guided through the nature of knowledge making in creative disciplines. This is a contested and contestable field. I’ve attached a PDF by Linda Candy called “ Practice based research: a guide” which might help sort some of these things out in your mind. There are other books and many different points of view

All the best,

4 things you should know about choosing examiners for your thesis

Tags: thesis rejection

Why Are Academic Papers Rejected and How Can You Prevent That?

Academic writing gives us new perspectives and advances knowledge by providing evidential support to selected and exciting topics. More often than not, however, academic papers don’t make it to journal publishing. In this article, we will discuss why papers are rejected, how to prevent that from happening, and the next steps following a rejection.

What Is an Academic Paper?

The scope of an academic paper is to persuade readers of an idea or solution to a problem based on evidence instead of personal opinion. Academic writing presents the reader either with a thesis or an informed argument, or both. The research process prior to writing consists of investigation, asking questions, and developing answers which require thoughtful reflection and critical thinking.

Before a paper is accepted for publishing in a journal, it undergoes a peer-review process , completed by researchers in the same field. This process guarantees the article’s academic standard. Learn more about the nine steps for publishing an academic paper for tips on getting your manuscript published.

Orvium Alternatives

Despite advances in technology, publication processes are complicated, averaging about 12 months between submission and publication . However, with blockchain technology, manuscripts can be available from the moment they are submitted, even in the early draft stages. This would put an end to the inconvenient process of re-submitting research while the dissemination of manuscripts would be greatly accelerated.

As an alternative to this inconvenient process and rejected manuscripts, Orvium benefits from being a preprint and peer-review platform at the same time. Functioning on blockchain technology, it has the potential to change publishing processes as we know them. You can read more about the 7 Benefits of Blockchain in Publishing Platforms in our article.

Reasons Why Academic Papers Are Rejected

Rejection occurs for all types of reasons. It’s not uncommon in academic publishing, unfortunately. It’s rare for researchers to have their research accepted during their first attempt, and it’s much harder for the newcomers. Don’t become discouraged, though. Although rejection isn’t a walk in the park, perseverance, patience, and an interest in advancing science will get you to where you need to be.

Below is a list of some reasons why academic papers are rejected, loosely categorized into editorial and technical reasons:

Editorial Reasons

The manuscript does not fall within the journal’s aim or scope - early researchers typically overlook this aspect and send their manuscripts to journals without giving much thought to the value their research adds to the publication and its readers. Since each journal has a well-defined scope, it’s best to look on their website before submission.
Paper is under review with another journal - most journals mention in their submission guidelines that they don’t accept a manuscript or paper if it’s under consideration elsewhere. So this type of journal won’t even glance at such a submission. This is an inefficient process compared to Orvium’s model , where anyone can peer-review in parallel and there aren’t such constraints.
Doesn’t conform to the writing style of that particular journal - always check the writing guidelines for every journal you’re thinking of submitting to, as every one of them will have different fonts, font sizes, margins, spaces, and referencing styles they prefer. This is one of the most common reasons for rejection , especially within the early researcher community.
Writing is incomprehensible - journals usually want manuscripts written in the simplest way possible, so excessive jargon or poor English won’t make the cut. Other reasons such as spelling mistakes, bad grammar, and missing tables, figures, or a list of authors will also not make the cut. If you’re having a hard time with a manuscript, there are 19 tools for researchers to write better to help you.

Technical Reasons

Research doesn’t add value to the journal - basically, a journal editor doesn’t find your results significant or novel enough for publishing. This could mean that they think the results will not have far-reaching implications in your field of study or research. Additionally, it’s important for journals with a high impact factor that the research is novel and has not been published before.
Unclear hypothesis - if the hypothesis, the original assumption before testing to prove whether it’s true or false, is not clear or explores an already established hypothesis, chances of getting rejected are high.
Lack of supporting evidence - collected data is not enough to arrive at the proposed result in the paper. Any data that doesn’t support the original hypothesis will inevitably be rejected.
Wrong research methodology - with so many newer, better methods that lead to more accurate results in research available, any use of older research methodology is unacceptable. The assumption will be that the research results are flawed, as there are better research methods.
Violation of research ethics - there is a list of research ethics that researchers need to know if they want to avoid misconduct. Taking written consent from any participants, a declaration that the work hasn’t been plagiarized, and other such actions must be complied with. Otherwise, the paper may be rejected on account of a violation of research ethics.

How to Prevent Rejection

If you’ve gotten rejected from more than one journal, there may be a reason for that. Acceptance rates for top-tier journals are very low due to the want to be considered prestigious. Up to 90% rejection rates are not uncommon for some top-tier journals, while others have a rejection rate of about 50%. Unfortunately, there is no universal standard for calculating a journal’s acceptance rate. Therefore, every journal follows an approach they see fit.

For highly specialized fields, if the number of researchers in that particular field of study is low, the acceptance rate is higher. Case reports, for example, might get rejected more often, whereas research articles might not. It all depends on the journal. Some journals include their acceptance rates on their websites. Unfortunately, this means that there is no proven way to prevent rejection , but there are ways to prevent rejection blues:

Don’t take anything personally - your rejection has more to do with the way your manuscript is written than with you as a researcher or scientist.
Refocus your mind on why you started the article in the first place - this may be to present new findings or advancements in science or medicine.
Push through the fear - practice and facing hundreds of previous rejections are the reasons why you’ll be able to act after being rejected instead of simply getting discouraged or giving up.

Rejection is common and inevitable , so instead of focusing on avoiding rejection, researchers should instead focus on their options after rejection.

What Are the Next Steps Following a Rejection?

It’s important to remember that rejection doesn’t mean a poorly written manuscript . Even well-known researchers can and have gotten rejected. But facing rejection after hours of writing, editing, and formatting an article, combined with the months waiting for a journal with high rejection rates to accept it, can be discouraging, to say the least. Don’t give up, though; follow these steps for a better possibility of acceptance next time around:

Revise and resubmit to the same journal , or submit to a different journal - although unpleasant for any writer, look at how many revisions you have to do and the effort required to resubmit it to the same journal, and compare it with moving on to submission to another journal. Keep in mind that another journal may have other criteria or a different style format. Check the journal’s website in any case.
Persistence and perseverance - you went through the steps, developed a research proposal, got it funded, carefully conducted the study, and objectively analyzed the data. Now, rejection makes you question whether all of it was worth it. Don’t think of publication in a journal as the last step of this long process. You are constantly learning, and editing and resubmission teach you perseverance. Only those who persevere can become successful.
Don’t lose heart - rejection and disappointment tend to go hand in hand in this case, especially for early-career researchers, whose careers sometimes depend on publications in journals. There is the possibility of resubmission; however, there are so many tools to help you write better and a plethora of journal options to choose from. If one journal (or two, or three) rejects you, try again and remember that all great work will eventually be published somewhere.

Journals have high standards when it comes to publishing. Great academics and papers get rejected, and this is common. On the one hand, it makes sense for journals to only showcase great work that has the proper research to back it up; conversely, rejection hits everyone differently, and some researchers may give up after too many rejections.

It’s important to remember that rejection could be hard but, sometimes, it’s an unavoidable part of the process. Moreover, this process can help you to better yourself, your writing, and your research. If you received reviews for your manuscript, you now have ideas on how to improve it. There are also many different tools and programs to help you along the way.

Orvium, for example, is a big help for researchers. We get your manuscript ready for publication faster and increase your publishing opportunities with fellow peer-reviewers from your field. Check out our platform , too, for inspiration when researching and writing.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Get the latest posts delivered right to your inbox.

Now check your inbox and click the link to confirm your subscription.

Please enter a valid email address

Oops! There was an error sending the email, please try later.

Roberto Rabasco

+10 years’ experience working for Deutsche Telekom, Just Eat or Asos. Leading, designing and developing high-availability software solutions, he built his own software house in '16

Recommended for you

How to Write a Research Funding Application | Orvium

Increasing Representation and Diversity in Research with Open Science | Orvium

Your Guide to Open Access Week 2023

Discoveries
Right Journal
Journal Metrics
Journal Fit
Abbreviation
In-Text Citations
Bibliographies
Writing an Article
Peer Review Types
Acknowledgements
Withdrawing a Paper
Form Letter
ISO, ANSI, CFR
Google Scholar
Journal Manuscript Editing
Research Manuscript Editing

Book Editing

Manuscript Editing Services

Medical Editing

Bioscience Editing
Physical Science Editing
PhD Thesis Editing Services
PhD Editing
Master’s Proofreading
Bachelor’s Editing
Dissertation Proofreading Services
Best Dissertation Proofreaders
Masters Dissertation Proofreading
PhD Proofreaders
Proofreading PhD Thesis Price
Journal Article Editing
Book Editing Service
Editing and Proofreading Services
Research Paper Editing
Medical Manuscript Editing
Academic Editing
Social Sciences Editing
Academic Proofreading
PhD Theses Editing
Dissertation Proofreading
Proofreading Rates UK
Medical Proofreading
PhD Proofreading Services UK
Academic Proofreading Services UK

Medical Editing Services

Life Science Editing
Biomedical Editing
Environmental Science Editing
Pharmaceutical Science Editing
Economics Editing
Psychology Editing
Sociology Editing
Archaeology Editing
History Paper Editing
Anthropology Editing
Law Paper Editing
Engineering Paper Editing
Technical Paper Editing
Philosophy Editing
PhD Dissertation Proofreading
Lektorat Englisch
Akademisches Lektorat
Lektorat Englisch Preise
Wissenschaftliches Lektorat
Lektorat Doktorarbeit

PhD Thesis Editing

Thesis Proofreading Services
PhD Thesis Proofreading
Proofreading Thesis Cost
Proofreading Thesis
Thesis Editing Services
Professional Thesis Editing
Thesis Editing Cost
Proofreading Dissertation
Dissertation Proofreading Cost
Dissertation Proofreader
Correção de Artigos Científicos
Correção de Trabalhos Academicos
Serviços de Correção de Inglês
Correção de Dissertação
Correção de Textos Precos
定額ネイティブチェック
Copy Editing
FREE Courses
Revision en Ingles
Revision de Textos en Ingles
Revision de Tesis
Revision Medica en Ingles
Revision de Tesis Precio
Revisão de Artigos Científicos
Revisão de Trabalhos Academicos
Serviços de Revisão de Inglês
Revisão de Dissertação
Revisão de Textos Precos
Corrección de Textos en Ingles
Corrección de Tesis
Corrección de Tesis Precio
Corrección Medica en Ingles
Corrector ingles

Select Page

My Target Journal Rejected My Research Paper: What Should I Do?

Posted by Rene Tetzner | Aug 23, 2021 | Dealing with Paper Rejection | 0 |

My Target Journal Rejected My Research Paper: What Should I Do? It is never easy for authors to receive and accept a journal editor’s rejection of an academic or scientific paper. Even researchers who have been through the dark paths of rejection and eventually emerged, published if not entirely unscathed, on the other side are unlikely to welcome such news about a manuscript submitted to a journal. They will probably be the most likely, however, to remind authors new to scholarly publishing that rejection is extremely common – the rate is as high as 90% of submitted manuscripts among the most prestigious scientific journals – and that there are constructive ways to make the most of the situation as you continue to pursue your publication goals.

There are two primary kinds of rejection. The first kind is almost immediate and is often referred to as a desk rejection. It takes place before peer review and is the result of problems such as an author submitting an incomplete manuscript, neglecting the journal’s instructions for authors or failing to achieve a standard of English that allows the research to be understood and reviewed. In such cases, resubmission to the same journal is often possible after the problems have been resolved, but if the reasons for immediate rejection involve a poor fit for the journal or an insignificant advancement of current knowledge, it is unlikely the editor will be interested in your work, in which case it will be best to submit your paper to a journal better suited to your research. If, on the other hand, the rejection is the result of some publishing misconduct such as plagiarism or submitting a paper to more than one journal simultaneously, it is probable the editor will not want to reconsider your manuscript even if the work is of interest to the journal, but you will have a good idea of what must be changed before you submit your paper to a different journal.

The second kind of rejection comes after the peer reviewers have assessed a manuscript and written critical reports on it, so your methods, results and interpretations will probably be the focus, though issues such as language, formatting and references might still arise. Often reviewer comments and an editor’s decision are sent to the author on the assumption, explicitly stated or otherwise, that the paper will be reconsidered and ideally published if the author makes the changes necessary to address the concerns of the peer reviewers. If this is the case, revising and resubmitting the manuscript as soon as possible is usually the best option, especially if you feel that you can make all or most of the required changes. Be sure to consider every comment thoughtfully and critically, especially those you disagree with most, and recognise that even instances of simple misunderstanding can indicate the need for change to clarify your presentation of data or your interpretation of findings. Do not forget to include a letter with your resubmission that explains in detail exactly what you have changed in response to the reviewers’ comments as well as what you could not change, providing a sound research-based reason when the latter is the case.

If it is clear in the post-review rejection you receive that resubmission to the same journal is not a possibility, do not take your frustration out on the editor and do not give up. Persistence and progressive improvement are the keys to success, and the comments of the editor and peer reviewers can be used to revise and improve your manuscript before you submit it to a different journal. Though you need not address every review comment when you are submitting your writing elsewhere, it is always a wise strategy to make selective use of the expert criticism the reviewers have provided. It is also possible that one of those experts may be recruited to peer review your paper for the second journal, so completely ignoring the suggestions he or she has already taken the time to offer will not promote a positive second review. While you are revising, make sure that you also tailor your manuscript to observe the formatting guidelines and documentation style of the new journal, and be sure to rewrite your cover letter to address the new editor and explain why your paper is such a good fit for the publication.

You might be interested in Services offered by Proof-Reading-Service.com

Journal editing.

Journal article editing services

PhD thesis editing services

Scientific Editing

Manuscript editing.

Manuscript editing services

Expert Editing

Expert editing for all papers

Research Editing

Research paper editing services

Professional book editing services

The Journal Rejected My Research Paper: What Should I Do?

The Journal Rejected My Research Paper: What Should I Do? This post explains two kinds of journal article rejection and proposes advice on responding to rejection

Dealing with Manuscript Rejection

September 8, 2021

Journal Rejection via Form Letter

September 9, 2021

Revising a Rejected Journal Paper – Helpful Tips and Advice

August 20, 2021

Journal Rejection Due to Content – An Excellent Opportunity

August 19, 2021

Our Recent Posts

Examples of Research Paper Topics in Different Study Areas

Our review ratings

Examples of Research Paper Topics in Different Study Areas Score: 98%
Dealing with Language Problems – Journal Editor’s Feedback Score: 95%
Making Good Use of a Professional Proofreader Score: 92%
How To Format Your Journal Paper Using Published Articles Score: 95%
Journal Rejection as Inspiration for a New Perspective Score: 95%

What Happens if You Fail Your Dissertation?

In University by Think Student Editor February 9, 2023 Leave a Comment

A dissertation module is one of the key things that defines the step up from secondary school to university. It’s one of the biggest pieces of writing you’ll do for your degree, in terms of research and word count. It’s no mistake to think that a lot rests on a good dissertation. However, it’s always good to be prepared for the worst-case scenario. You’ve probably already asked the question – what actually happens if you do fail?

If you fail your dissertation for the first time at any degree level, you will be allowed one resubmission, which is usually capped at the pass mark. However, if you fail your dissertation resubmission, there are different consequences. If you fail your undergraduate dissertation, you can still graduate as long as you have enough credits, although this may be with an ordinary degree. However, if you fail your master’s dissertation or PhD thesis resubmission, you will not be allowed to graduate.

The topic of failure is quite daunting for most students. Not to worry! This article is here to help you understand failure criteria for a dissertation, and what happens in the event of failure.

Table of Contents

Is it possible to fail your dissertation?

Like with modules of your university course, unfortunately it is very much possible to fail your dissertation . Although this sounds daunting, don’t worry too much! Dissertations are not designed for you to fail.

The grading systems for university modules and dissertations are very similar . Across most universities, the pass mark for a dissertation is 40% or 50%. For example, check out this guide by Royal Holloway University, London to learn more about their dissertation grading.

This means that while it is certainly possible to fail your dissertation, it is unlikely that you actually will . However, in the event that you do fail your dissertation for whatever reason, don’t panic. Your university will usually let you resit your dissertation .

Keep in mind you’ll only be able to resit your dissertation once , so try your hardest to achieve the grade you want. For all the details you’ll need about a dissertation, I’d definitely recommend reading this Think Student article.

In summary, while it is possible to fail a dissertation (just like any other university module), a dissertation only requires a pass mark of 40%. Although a dissertation is different to a module, it is still pretty difficult to fail.

In the event you do fail your dissertation, don’t be too hard on yourself . Keep reading further to find out what happens if you fail your resit dissertation.

How bad does a dissertation need to be to fail?

To understand how “bad” a dissertation has to be to fail, you need to know what examiners are looking for.

Your university will have published the marking criteria for dissertations . These will normally feature comments on the key areas to earn marks in. As an example, check out the University of Edinburgh’s dissertation criteria here .

Therefore, if you failed your dissertation, it isn’t necessarily because you’re “bad at researching and writing”. To fail, it has to be the case that you didn’t meet the criteria to achieve a passing mark. It’s important to keep your confidence, so that you can do better when you resit.

If you haven’t written your dissertation yet, I’d definitely recommend looking through your university’s marking criteria. Similarly , your tutor will want to help you as much as possible, so you can ask them for advice if you’re really struggling .

If you’re seeking advice on how to write a dissertation, you should check out this Think Student article.

Can you graduate without passing your dissertation?

For an undergraduate degree, you can still graduate as long as you have enough credits to pass the other modules .

However , if your degree is a BSc or BA with Honours, if you fail your dissertation and the resit dissertation, you will graduate with an ordinary degree . You can read more about what an ordinary degree is in this Think Student article.

If you fail your first dissertation attempt, but pass your resit undergraduate dissertation, you will still pass with whatever class of degree you earned.

However, the rule is slightly different for master’s dissertations and a PhD thesis. These rules also depend on the university you attend .

At all universities, you are allowed one resit of coursework (dissertation is a form of coursework, as it is not a timed exam), even for a master’s degree and a PhD. However, if you fail your resit dissertation for your master’s degree, you cannot be awarded a master’s degree.

In the case of a PhD, you will not be able to graduate with a failed resit thesis . I’ll explain this in more detail later in the article, so keep reading!

What happens if you fail your master’s dissertation?

Failing your master’s dissertation for the first time isn’t ideal, but it isn’t the end of the world. You’re allowed a resit, which if you pass, means you can still graduate with a master’s degree.

However, a failure is a lot more serious if you fail your dissertation a second time . Failing a resit dissertation at master’s degree-level means you cannot graduate with a master’s degree.

This doesn’t mean you can’t be awarded anything at all for your effort. For example, the this page by the University of Nottingham states that if your dissertation is not passable but still “adequate”, you may still be awarded a diploma .

What happens if you fail your PhD thesis?

Like with an undergraduate or master’s degree, you’re allowed to resubmit your thesis once only . Given that you pass the resubmission, you’ll still be on track to graduate with a PhD.

Failing a PhD thesis resubmission means you cannot graduate. The pass mark for a PhD thesis is usually around 60 , such as at the University of Cambridge, which you can learn more about on their website, here .

In most cases, a PhD thesis will account for around 50% of the degree . Looking at it this way, it makes sense that if you failed half of your degree, you wouldn’t be able to graduate. A PhD is a research-based degree, and the thesis proves you have good research skills.

If you’d like to know more about how a PhD is graded, I’d recommend this Think Student article.

How often do students fail their dissertation?

As I established earlier, it’s pretty hard to fail your undergraduate dissertation module . It’s also quite hard to fail a master’s dissertation or a PhD thesis given the pass mark.

According to this article by The Healthy Journal, up to 50% of PhD students will not finish their thesis or graduate . This statistic sounds quite extreme, but keep in mind that not many people choose to complete a PhD because of the amount of time and money it takes.

If you really are concerned about failing your dissertation, speak to your tutor . They will have been in your position and will know how to help. Don’t struggle on your own!

Call us : 0091 80 4111 6961

Common Pitfalls in Avoiding Rejection for PhD Thesis

Avoiding Rejection

Starting the process of writing a PhD thesis is a huge undertaking, but one that comes with its own set of challenges and uncertainties. One of the most formidable obstacles that aspiring researchers face is the fear of PhD thesis rejection. As we delve into the world of academia, where knowledge is rigorously scrutinized, it is crucial to be aware of the common pitfalls that can lead to the rejection of your painstakingly developed thesis. In this exploration of common pitfalls in avoiding rejection for PhD thesis , we will unravel the PhD thesis rejection reasons and equip you with invaluable insights to navigate this treacherous terrain successfully. Whether you are just beginning your doctoral journey or have experienced the frustration of a PhD thesis rejected, this guide aims to provide you with essential knowledge and strategies to ensure that your research is met with the approval it deserves.

1.Poor Research Design:

Failing a PhD dissertation happens for a few common reasons, and one biggie is bad research design. Another big one, according to the folks on the examination committees, is that people often don’t critically analyze their stuff. Your dissertation isn’t just about regurgitating what others have already said or done – it needs to bring something fresh to the table. Oh, and here’s a tip: your thesis should be like a well-orchestrated symphony, not a random mixtape of chapters thrown together without rhyme or reason. Spend some quality time upfront thinking about how to structure the whole thing, from the big picture to the nitty-gritty chapter details. And let’s not forget about the presentation. Most of the dissertations that flop are full of silly mistakes – typos, grammar bloopers, messed-up references, and just plain messy formatting. Trust me, committee members don’t appreciate a hot mess of a dissertation.

2. Originality and Contribution:

So, when you’re avoiding rejection for PhD thesis, here’s the deal: it’s not just about summarizing stuff; you’ve got to bring something fresh to the table. It’s like adding your special spice to the academic stew. There are different ways to do this – you can mix and match existing ideas, come up with a brand-new technique, or put a unique spin on old knowledge. But here’s the kicker: your thesis should flow smoothly like a well-written story, not be a mishmash of random chapters. Think of it as crafting a good playlist, not just throwing together a bunch of random songs. Keep it all coherent and connected. Oh, and here’s a pro tip from an article in University Affairs Career Advice: Don’t try to reinvent the wheel or act like you’re the ultimate expert in your field. Sometimes, the gold lies in those tiny gaps within well-studied areas, where you can bring in fresh perspectives or give old ideas a new twist.

3. Citation and Plagiarism:

When you’re trying to understand your PhD thesis rejection reasons, you have to be super careful about citation and plagiarism. Now, here’s an interesting tidbit: the University of Mysore actually says it’s okay to have up to 30% of your thesis match with other sources. But remember, it’s not a free pass to copy and paste; it’s more like a guideline because the plagiarism levels are different according to institutions and journal demands. To stay on the safe side and dodge any plagiarism bullets, it’s smart to run your thesis through plagiarism checkers. These tools help make sure your work is all your own and doesn’t accidentally match up with someone else’s stuff. And don’t forget, you should always cite every source you use, even if it’s your own work.

4. Language and Writing Quality:

A well-written PhD thesis is essential for success. Here are some more specific and practical tips to help researchers improve the quality of their thesis:

i. Clarity and Structure: Your thesis should have a clear and logical structure. Each chapter or section should flow naturally from the previous one. Organise your writing with headings and subheadings to help the reader.

ii. Audience Awareness: Keep in mind that your thesis will be read not only by experts in your field but also by a broader academic audience. Avoid excessive jargon, and when you do use technical terms, provide clear explanations.

iii. Active Voice: Active voice is indeed more reader-friendly. Your writing becomes more interesting and direct as a result. Instead of saying “It was observed that,” say “I observed that.”

iv. Conciseness: Be concise and avoid unnecessary repetition. Remove any sentences or paragraphs that don’t contribute to your main argument.

Remember that a PhD thesis is a significant scholarly achievement, and the quality of your writing is a reflection of your dedication and expertise. Taking the time to write a clear, well-structured, and error-free thesis will greatly enhance its impact and impress your committee members.

5. Feedback and Peer Review:

When you’re dealing with a PhD thesis rejected, remember that feedback and peer review are your secret weapons for making that document shine. Your thesis journey is like a team sport – your chair and committee members are your MVPs. They’ll give you the guidance you need to level up your work and become a true scholar. In order to enhance the effectiveness of peer review in academia, it is imperative to establish clearer guidelines for assessing feedback quality and implementing additional training for faculty members who participate in the review process. This approach will ensure that everyone involved is aligned in their understanding of what constitutes constructive feedback and how to provide it, ultimately contributing to the improvement and refinement of research work like your thesis.

Final thoughts

In conclusion, navigating the intricate journey of crafting a successful PhD thesis and avoiding rejection for PhD thesis can be a challenging endeavor. This process demands meticulous attention to detail, unwavering dedication, and a deep understanding of the common PhD thesis rejection reasons. The pitfalls discussed in this exploration shed light on the crucial aspects that aspiring doctoral candidates must be vigilant about. From conducting thorough research and robust proofreading to ensuring proper citation and adherence to guidelines, each step plays a pivotal role in mitigating the risk of having one’s PhD thesis rejected. By proactively addressing these common pitfalls, students can significantly enhance their chances of success and gain valuable insights that will serve them well throughout their academic careers.

At PhDThesis, we understand the anxieties and pressures that come with pursuing a doctorate, and we’re committed to helping you navigate the complex landscape of PhD thesis writing. Our dedicated team of experts and comprehensive services are designed to assist you at every stage of your thesis journey. From refining research proposals and conducting rigorous editing to providing guidance on structuring and formatting your thesis, we are here to ensure that your hard work and dedication culminate in a successful PhD thesis submission. With our support, you can confidently tackle the challenges that often lead to PhD thesis rejection and take a significant step towards achieving your academic goals.

1 .Causes of manuscript rejection and how to handle a rejected manuscript?

Ans. Causes of manuscript rejection are multifaceted and can include issues like poor study design, inadequate literature review, or subpar writing. To handle a rejected manuscript, carefully assess reviewer comments, revise diligently, and seek feedback from colleagues or mentors. Learning from the reasons behind the rejection can help you improve and increase your chances of acceptance, just as one would in avoiding rejection for a PhD thesis.

2. What happens if your PhD dissertation is rejected?

Ans. If your PhD dissertation is rejected, it can be disheartening but isn’t the end of the road. Review the rejection feedback, consult with your advisor, and revise your work meticulously. Resubmitting an improved version can often lead to acceptance. Remember, facing initial setbacks is part of the PhD journey, and persistence is key to overcoming PhD thesis rejection reasons.

3. How to develop a quality research article and avoid a journal desk rejection?

Ans. Developing a quality research article that avoids journal desk rejection involves meticulous planning, thorough literature review, robust methodology, and adherence to journal guidelines. Seek feedback from peers or mentors to refine your work before submission. By taking these steps, you can significantly reduce the risk of encountering rejection and better understand how to avoid rejection for a PhD thesis in the future.

4. Can a PhD proposal be rejected?

Ans. Yes, a PhD proposal can be rejected if it fails to meet the standards set by the reviewing committee or if it lacks a clear research question, sound methodology, or relevance. To prevent this, ensure your proposal is well-researched, structured, and aligned with your field’s expectations, ultimately mitigating the likelihood of a PhD proposal being rejected and helping you navigate the path toward your PhD thesis successfully.

Request a Call Back

Academic Writing
Data Analysis
Data collection
Dissertation
Dissertation Defense Preparation
Experimental Research
Limitation and Delimitation
Literature Review
Manuscript Publication
PhD Research
Quantitative Research
Questionnaires
Research Design
Research Methodology
Research Paper Writing
Research Proposal
Research Scholar
Topic Selection
Uncategorized