journal of colloid and interface science一天后编辑给interim decision小修，编辑给了一堆格式和写作要求，要求改完才能送审，现在JCIC还有这种操作吗？这意见可咋改啊？


I have read and evaluated the manuscript and in my opinion the submission does not yet sufficiently justify publication.



The new conceptual advances in colloid and interface science are not clearly explained, and it will be of limited interest to the broader JCIS readership. For those reasons I feel it is not yet of the highest priority for JCIS.



A number of related papers have been found in a literature search.



There is a significant amount of work covering the general field, and the specific topic of study in particular. It is unclear if this submission advances this field sufficiently to warrant publication in JCIS.



There are no references given in the Conclusions section: some must be added to amplify how this research work contributes to forwarding the field of study.



Comparisons of the performance and behavior of these new systems against standards, and other related studies from the literature are required to improve the significance of the work.



Please emphasize the relevance of this work to new findings in colloid and interface science.



References to previously published work should appear in the Conclusions section to emphasize the ways in which the new results have advanced the field.



- Scientific investigations are rigorous and reproducible observations so that rational deductions can be made from them.



- Reports of scientific investigations generate a fabric of knowledge: the new knowledge (your paper) is related to, and builds on, pre-existing knowledge (previous literature).



(For example, if you put bricks together in a logical structure you can build walls and houses).



- Science is NOT a set of isolated, unrelated, uncorrelated observations.



(For example, a random pile of bricks with no coherent structure has no useful purpose).



- The Conclusions section of your paper must always explain the new advances using supporting literature references to identify clearly the new findings and understandings.



If the Conclusions section does not discuss the new findings with reference to the previous relevant papers, then either:-



A. It cannot be called "Conclusions" but is only fit to be titled a much weaker "Summary".



Or



B. There is no previous relevant literature, and the results and findings are in fact so original your paper is better suited to one of the highest ranking journals.



For further guidance, and a recent good example of the format of a Conclusions section for JCIS, please refer to:-

 返回小木虫查看更多