Q: How can I highlight the novelty of my paper to improve its chances of acceptance?
I have got a high specific capacity for a pure compound that is comparatively higher than the other literature. My paper has been rejected for the reason. The novelty is not mentioned in the paper. I want to resubmit my paper.
To begin, some parts of your question were not clear. So, we have edited them for enhanced clarity.
Also, sorry to know your manuscript was rejected. However, based only on the information you have provided (that is, without seeing the entire manuscript), it may not be possible to determine if that was the main or only reason for rejection. There are several reasons why a manuscript is rejected, as you can read here.
So, it may be that your study was intrinsically not novel. If so, you will have to revisit (that is, revise) your paper. As you specifically talked about “other literature,” it may help to go back and do a more detailed literature review to determine other gaps worth studying. This will also help you compare your paper with other papers in the field to look at other areas of improvement. To know more about revisiting and revising your paper, refer to this similar query by another user: The journal editor says my research findings are not novel. What should I do?
If however you believe your current paper is novel but was rejected only because you did not present the novelty well enough, here are a couple of points to consider.
- If the focus of the paper is specific capacity, you can mention this in the title and the abstract (if you haven’t done so already). On receiving a manuscript, journal editors first go through the title and abstract to gauge if the study is novel and interesting enough. So, writing a relevant title and abstract are important for getting editors to go through your paper. Here’s a great resource to help you with this: How to write an effective title and abstract and choose appropriate keywords
- While the title and abstract will have a short mention of the focus, you should provide details in the various relevant sections of the paper: Introduction, where you are establishing the background and justification of your study; Results, where you share the findings of your study in an attempt to show how it differs from other studies; and Discussion, where you discuss your findings and also provide implications for your field. Here are a couple of resources to help you write these various sections:
As you see, if your study is indeed novel, it is important to establish and discuss its novelty throughout the paper.
Now, it’s not clear if you intend to resubmit to the same journal or to a new journal. We would suggest submitting to a new journal, beginning by making a presubmission inquiry.
Finally, here are a couple of related queries by other users that you may also find useful:
- How can I judge the novelty of my study?
- How can I highlight the novelty of my research in the manuscript?
All the best with the revision/resubmission!