Journal Desk Rejections: Common Reasons - Issue #4: Lack of Fit

Lack of Fit is another frequently cited reason for desk rejections in academic journals. This term generally refers to the mismatch between a manuscript's content and the journal's scope, focus, or guidelines. While topic relevance (the fit of the submission topic with the scope of the journal) is often considered a proxy for lack of fit, there are many other aspects that can also lead to desk rejections. In this post, I am outlining a few important dimensions of the lack of fit reason. Please feel free to add any I have missed in the comments.

What Lack of Fit Includes

Subject Matter (Topic Relevance): The manuscript's topic may not align with the journal's specific areas of interest.

Methodological Preferences: Some journals prefer certain research methods or designs. A qualitative study might not fit a journal that predominantly publishes quantitative research, and vice versa.

Theoretical Orientations: Journals may favor certain theoretical perspectives. If our manuscript does not align with these preferences, it might be rejected.

Types of Contributions: Journals often have specific formats they publish, such as original research articles, reviews, case studies, or commentaries. Submitting a technical article to a journal that only publishes empirical research articles could lead to a desk rejection.

Current Relevance: Journals look for work that contributes to ongoing conversations in the field. If our research is seen as outdated or not relevant to current debates, it might not be a good fit.

Novelty: The journal might seek novel contributions that push the field forward. If our work is perceived as reiterating known findings, it might be rejected.

Few Suggestions:

[1] Do Not Rely Solely on Journal Finder Tools: These tools recommend journals based on the occurrence of keywords, which might not reflect the true focus of the journal. For example, an article on artificial intelligence can be technical, theoretical, or empirical in nature. Journal finders may suggest all journals that have published articles on artificial intelligence, but technical journals would likely reject empirical articles and vice versa. Information Systems (IS) journals nowadays receive many technical papers; as they don't publish technical papers, most such submissions are desk rejected.

[2] Thoroughly Research Potential Journals: To ensure a good fit, read recently published articles to understand the journal's focus. This includes considering the methodologies, theoretical perspectives, and types of contributions the journal favors.

[2] Stay Updated on Journal Scope Changes: Journal homepages are not frequently modified, but changes in scope may occur due to changes in editors and editorial focus. Such changes are generally specified in the editorials published by new editors, so it is important to read editorials to stay informed about any changes in the focus and direction of journals we are interested in publishing in.

[3] Craft a Well-Written Cover Letter: A well-crafted cover letter can help editors see the relevance of our manuscript to the journal’s scope, potentially mitigating concerns about lack of fit.

By understanding what lack of fit entails and being aware of the general policies around it, we can improve our chances of selecting the right journal for our work and avoiding desk rejections.