Q: Do SCI journals reject papers with breakthrough results that challenge long-established knowledge?
Our research has breakthrough findings that challenge the second law of thermodynamics. This can be a very controversial issue. Does SCI journal reject such papers normally?
As long as you are sure about the strength of your experiments, results, and analyses, submitting to a journal would be the best way to find out if the work would be accepted or considered too radical. What is more, if you submit your work, you may have the additional benefit of receiving peer reviewer comments or opinions on your work. Research is about challenging existing knowledge. As authors, you should not hesitate to publish genuine findings out of the fear of getting rejected.
To answer your exact question, as far as the journal’s acceptance or rejection is concerned, it is not possible to predict the outcome ahead of time as each paper is reviewed by unique groups of reviewers. The reviewers are also chosen after submission based on the subject of the work. If the work has breakthrough results that challenge established conventions in the field, then the journal might see its merit, and the reviewers would also be chosen accordingly. This means that a high profile paper might get reviewed by high profile experts. I would, therefore, recommend the following:
- Choose a few target journals, and list them according to your publication priority.
- Submit your paper to one journal at a time. That way, in case you receive a rejection, you can submit to the second one on your list without wasiting any time.
- If you feel the need to justify the controversial nature of your work, you could do so as part of your discussion in the paper; this might convince the reviewers of the new material being presented.
Related reading:
This content belongs to the Conducting Research Stage