I Have Doubts About Preprints

This is the response you may receive from scientific journals regarding your manuscript.

These emails usually include the email signature of the editor-in-chief. I believe they are sent by the editorial office assistant regarding the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript.

I am providing an example of such an email that I received a few days ago after they decided to reject a scientific manuscript.

I frequently receive emails from many scientific journals that I carefully selected after thorough research to publish a scientific manuscript. Interestingly, some journals take weeks to send a rejection email.

Manuscript Number: [XXX-XXXX]
Manuscript Title: [XXXX]

Dear [Corresponding Author Name],

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to [Scientific Journal Name]. I regret to inform you that your manuscript does not reach the required standard of this journal and we must therefore reject it.

We appreciate your submitting your manuscript to this journal and for giving us the opportunity to consider your work. 

Yours sincerely,
[Name of Editor in chief]
Editor in chief
[Name of Scientific Journal] 

The manuscript does not meet the required standards of this journal' is one of the common reasons for manuscript rejection. However, you may receive emails citing other reasons, such as:

• Only 10% of submitted manuscripts are accepted for review.
• Your manuscript is outside the scope of [Scientific Journal Name].
• This manuscript appears to have been submitted simultaneously to multiple journals, which is scientifically unethical and against journal policy. Therefore, we will not consider it for publication in [Scientific Journal Name]. 

Overall, due to these rejection emails from scientific journals, you may lose many hours, days, months, or even years trying to publish your experimental data in a scientific journal.

Of course, Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4 rankings and journal impact factors are major hurdles, as most grant funding agencies and research progress evaluators prefer publications in high-impact Q1 journals. The JCR impact factor is typically the most recognized.

As a result, a researcher may spend months or even years generating research data, writing a scientific manuscript, and then struggling with repeated rejections.

In recent years, I have found that the 'Open Access' publication model has become another hurdle in publishing a scientific manuscript, as it requires researchers to arrange $3,000 or more to cover APC (Article Processing Charges) costs.

I believe Preprints are a good approach since they can at least serve as early evidence of productivity in grant applications or research progress reports for evaluators. However, most evaluators only recognize this merit once the manuscript is published in a peer-reviewed journal. I would recommend considering the allocation of points for Preprints during grant or research profile evaluations.

On the other hand, I see Preprints as a form of protection for research data and conclusions, preventing them from being copied. However, based on my personal experience, the interpretation of research data can lead to either a positive or negative conclusion, depending on how it is analyzed.

Lastly, I advise being careful when accepting offers from scientific journals to publish your manuscript with Preprints. When you submit your scientific manuscript for review and publication, many journals do not accept manuscripts that are already available on Preprint platforms. They may ask you to remove or update it before proceeding with the review process.