Rejection Reasons

Common Reasons for Rejection

To ensure your manuscript successfully passes the initial editorial desk review and proceeds to the peer-review stage, please review and avoid these common technical and editorial pitfalls:

 

Technical Reasons

  • Incomplete Data

    Insufficient sample size, imbalanced experimental setups, or lack of proper baseline/control groups.

  • Poor or Inappropriate Analysis

    Inappropriate statistical testing, incorrect evaluation metric calculations (e.g., accuracy, precision, recall in AI models), or lack of significance testing.

  • Inappropriate Methodology

    Using outdated frameworks, obsolete algorithms, or methodologies unsuited for testing the research hypotheses.

  • Weak Research Motivation / Gap

    Ambiguous research questions, unclear scientific novelty, or data that fails to address the proposed hypothesis.

  • Inaccurate Conclusions

    Drawing conclusions or claims based on subjective assumptions rather than solid experimental data.

 

Editorial Reasons

  • Out of Scope

    The topic does not align with JIKA’s official Focus and Scope.

  • Lack of Impact / Novelty

    The research merely duplicates existing applications or systems without contributing new technical insights or theoretical advancements.

  • Plagiarism & Publication Ethics Violations

    High similarity index, self-plagiarism, or duplicate submission issues.

  • Unaddressed Research Ethics

    Failure to provide participant consent (informed consent) or ethical clearance for research involving human subjects/users.

  • Formatting & Guideline Issues

    Failure to follow JIKA’s official template, structural requirements, or author guidelines.

  • Lack of Reproducibility

    Insufficient methodological or algorithmic details, making it impossible for other researchers to replicate the study.

  • Outdated References & Excessive Self-Citations

    Lack of recent primary literature (journals from the past 10 years) or relying heavily on self-citations.

  • Poor Language Quality

    Frequent typographical errors, poor grammar, or non-standard academic writing style.

  • Flawed Logic & Poor Data Presentation

    Disjointed narrative flow, confusing logical structure, or low-resolution, uninformative figures and tables.

 

 

"Ensuring your manuscript avoids these common pitfalls significantly increases the chance of it proceeding to the peer-review stage."