Why review papers get rejected : common pitfalls and how to avoid them
Kembro, Joakim LU
; Kunisch, Sven
and Durach, Christian F.
(2025)
In International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management
55(11).
p.163-192
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Purpose
In this paper, we discuss common pitfalls in producing review articles for publication in academic journals, offering guidance to minimize rejection rates. We highlight the dual core features of systematicity (i.e. rigor and transparency) and generativity (i.e. advancing knowledge) in review papers. Thereby, we aim to help researchers deal with the abundance of guidelines and create publishable literature reviews that meaningfully contribute to their fields. Additionally, we discuss the prospects and perils of incorporating advanced technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI), in review research.
Design/methodology/approach
Drawing from an analysis of editorial guidelines, desk-rejection decisions and... (More) - Purpose
In this paper, we discuss common pitfalls in producing review articles for publication in academic journals, offering guidance to minimize rejection rates. We highlight the dual core features of systematicity (i.e. rigor and transparency) and generativity (i.e. advancing knowledge) in review papers. Thereby, we aim to help researchers deal with the abundance of guidelines and create publishable literature reviews that meaningfully contribute to their fields. Additionally, we discuss the prospects and perils of incorporating advanced technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI), in review research.
Design/methodology/approach
Drawing from an analysis of editorial guidelines, desk-rejection decisions and reviewer feedback, as well as our experience as authors, reviewers and editors, we identify six common pitfalls of literature reviews. For each pitfall, we discuss typical manifestations and mitigation strategies. We also incorporate illustrative examples of literature reviews that have successfully navigated these pitfalls.
Findings
We identify and discuss six common pitfalls: (1) lack of compelling motivation, (2) weak conceptual foundation, (3) poor research design, (4) flawed research method, (5) insufficient knowledge contributions and (6) poor paper crafting – which undermine systematicity and generativity. For each of the pitfalls, we put forward mitigation strategies, which collectively help improve systematicity and generativity. Additionally, we anticipate and discuss two (emerging) pitfalls related to AI and digital technologies in review research: irresponsible and ineffective use of AI. Again, we propose mitigation strategies.
Originality/value
We offer a structured framework to help researchers overcome common challenges in literature reviews and reduce the likelihood of rejection by leading academic journals. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/a595f61d-de21-49e2-8a29-d5587fd66b19
- author
- Kembro, Joakim
LU
; Kunisch, Sven
and Durach, Christian F.
- organization
- publishing date
- 2025-08-15
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Literature review, Systematic literature review, Structured literature review, Review research, Research methods, Academic writing, Publishing
- in
- International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management
- volume
- 55
- issue
- 11
- pages
- 30 pages
- publisher
- Emerald Group Publishing Limited
- ISSN
- 0960-0035
- DOI
- 10.1108/IJPDLM-03-2025-0125
- language
- Swedish
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- a595f61d-de21-49e2-8a29-d5587fd66b19
- date added to LUP
- 2025-08-31 11:33:32
- date last changed
- 2025-09-18 13:28:50
@article{a595f61d-de21-49e2-8a29-d5587fd66b19,
abstract = {{Purpose<br/>In this paper, we discuss common pitfalls in producing review articles for publication in academic journals, offering guidance to minimize rejection rates. We highlight the dual core features of systematicity (i.e. rigor and transparency) and generativity (i.e. advancing knowledge) in review papers. Thereby, we aim to help researchers deal with the abundance of guidelines and create publishable literature reviews that meaningfully contribute to their fields. Additionally, we discuss the prospects and perils of incorporating advanced technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI), in review research.<br/><br/>Design/methodology/approach<br/>Drawing from an analysis of editorial guidelines, desk-rejection decisions and reviewer feedback, as well as our experience as authors, reviewers and editors, we identify six common pitfalls of literature reviews. For each pitfall, we discuss typical manifestations and mitigation strategies. We also incorporate illustrative examples of literature reviews that have successfully navigated these pitfalls.<br/><br/>Findings<br/>We identify and discuss six common pitfalls: (1) lack of compelling motivation, (2) weak conceptual foundation, (3) poor research design, (4) flawed research method, (5) insufficient knowledge contributions and (6) poor paper crafting – which undermine systematicity and generativity. For each of the pitfalls, we put forward mitigation strategies, which collectively help improve systematicity and generativity. Additionally, we anticipate and discuss two (emerging) pitfalls related to AI and digital technologies in review research: irresponsible and ineffective use of AI. Again, we propose mitigation strategies.<br/><br/>Originality/value<br/>We offer a structured framework to help researchers overcome common challenges in literature reviews and reduce the likelihood of rejection by leading academic journals.}},
author = {{Kembro, Joakim and Kunisch, Sven and Durach, Christian F.}},
issn = {{0960-0035}},
keywords = {{Literature review; Systematic literature review; Structured literature review; Review research; Research methods; Academic writing; Publishing}},
language = {{swe}},
month = {{08}},
number = {{11}},
pages = {{163--192}},
publisher = {{Emerald Group Publishing Limited}},
series = {{International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management}},
title = {{Why review papers get rejected : common pitfalls and how to avoid them}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-03-2025-0125}},
doi = {{10.1108/IJPDLM-03-2025-0125}},
volume = {{55}},
year = {{2025}},
}