24小时热门版块排行榜

返回列表

当前只显示满足指定条件的回帖，点击这里查看本话题的所有回帖

愤怒的老鸟

至尊木虫 (著名写手)

应助: 21 (小学生)
金币: 14880
散金: 110
红花: 32
帖子: 1483
在线: 480.7小时
虫号: 2249240
注册: 2013-01-19
性别: GG
专业: 固体力学

[求助] 这样的审稿意意见不知道还有没有必要回答，真是纠结已有2人参与

最近收到了期刊的审稿意见，该期刊是本领域的高水平期刊，收到期刊的审稿意见如下：
Comments from the editors and reviewers:
-Reviewer 1 -
In my opinion, the present paper does not contain any new and significant information adequate to justify publication. Hence, the present study can not be accepted for the publication.

-Reviewer 2
It is not clear what are the new developments or added value of this work. This should be further clarified.
*******
该处具体意见有两条，省略
提的意见都特别难回答。

Reviewer 3
References incomplete. Authors of ****(Journal name), should cite relevant papers, especially from same journal. Some of the concepts are quite advance or too lengthy to describe them, thus, references must be as complete as possible to lead the less experienced readers

按我的理解，如果是这样的审稿意见，直接就应该被毙掉。
我换一个期刊投稿，也行。
然而，主编却给了大修（Major Revision），真是让我很蛋疼啊。
我怕回答了也可能被拒稿，不回答也觉得可惜了。

纠结！！

回复此楼