Despite the recent growth of attention to English for research publication purposes, little is known about how researchers view the role of peer review in their success of publication. In light of this gap, the present study investigated Iranian surgeons' attitudes towards peer review and the challenges they face in getting their papers published. To this end, 26 Iranian surgeons were interviewed, and the transcribed data were analyzed through thematic analysis. The results revealed that firstly the surgeons attested to the positive and negative contributions of peer review in terms of changing or unchanging their attitudes, respectively. Secondly, the authors faced a myriad of challenges related to editors, reviewers, and socio-political-linguistic factors in getting their papers published. Moreover, they associated these challenges with positive and negative effects in being connected to their career-stage development and motivating them to conduct and submit more papers. The study concludes with implications for research and practice in how researchers can craft more quality papers to enhance their chance of publication in high-quality journals.