Why I Rejected Your Paper: Common Pitfalls in Writing Theory Papers and How to Avoid Them

In the last issue of AMR, our colleagues highlighted just how intensely emotional the process of publishing in AMR can be, and discussed specific coping strategies at each stage of the review process (Bundy, Shipp, & Brickson, 2022). As they outlined, each stage, from initial submission to acceptance or rejection, is accompanied by myriad feelings—both highs and lows. The lows associated with having a paper rejected have been well-documented. For example, Horn (2016) empirically examined the effect of rejection and showed that it puts the self-esteem and identity of scholars at risk. In a similar vein, Day (2011) discussed emotional responses to manuscript rejection and various coping strategies (on rejection and career resilience, see also Walker, 2019). Less often discussed are the negative emotions associate editors (AEs) experience when they have to reject a paper, even when it is clear that a lot of work has been put into the manuscript. Emotions can be even more crushing when we need to reject a paper after a revise-and-resubmit (R&R) invitation and the authors have again devoted months of work to revising the paper. The AE’s goal is to publish papers—there is no greater joy in an AE’s world than accepting a paper for publication, and perhaps no harder decision than having to reject a revision. With this in mind, we would like to share some of the AEs’ frequently cited reasons for rejection at both the initial submission and the revision stage, as well as suggesting possible remedies.