24小时热门版块排行榜

>论坛更新日志 (3126)
>虫友互识 (363)
>休闲灌水 (179)
>导师招生 (140)
>文献求助 (129)
>论文道贺祈福 (54)
>论文投稿 (47)
>考博 (46)
>博后之家 (38)
>考研 (32)
>硕博家园 (30)
>招聘信息布告栏 (24)
>基金申请 (20)
>找工作 (14)
>公派出国 (14)
>教师之家 (12)

返回列表

【有奖交流】积极回复本帖子，参与交流，就有机会分得作者 skyzhangy 的 2 个金币

skyzhangy

木虫 (正式写手)

应助: 8 (幼儿园)
金币: 1771.9
散金: 1414
红花: 13
帖子: 827
在线: 82.1小时
虫号: 301877
注册: 2006-12-02
专业: 凝聚态物性 II ：电子结构

[交流] JMCC稿件交流

各位大侠，小弟前些日子投JMCC的paper审稿意见回来了，3个审稿人，第一个说有类似的工作发表（并给了两篇文献），可是我找来一看发现完全是属于相同材料种类不同维度（0，1, 2, 3维）的体系，当然该审稿人也没有说直接拒稿；第二个，直接接收，评价很好；第三个（仲裁人）给了拒稿，意见和第一个一模一样（不同的表述），另外还提了点建议，结果发现也不是完全正确，给人直接的感觉就是没有好好把我的文章看完。
   结果自然是拒稿了。

   我自然是不服，给编辑写信，说明了具体情况后，编辑给了下面的回复。现在在犹豫要不要上述？上述成功的可能性有多大？

   当然这里需要说明一下，审稿人给出的两篇类似的工作，其中一篇就是我之前的研究工作（做的是一维纳米线的工作）；另一篇是三维块体的工作；当然我现在这个工作做的是二维薄膜，得到的性质比我之前一维体系的要好，而且侧重点也是不一样的。

下面是编辑的回信：
Thank you for contacting us about your manuscript, which was handled by my colleague Dr Ruth Zadik. I have considered the original reports and your responses very carefully. As you know, the decision to reject your manuscript was based on the comments of reviewers 1 and 3 that the similar previous reports in PCCP reduce the appeal of the current work, and both reviewers indicated to the editor that the novelty and impact of the work are below the requirements of this particular journal. As the decision was based on these factors, I am not willing to consider a revised version of the manuscript at this stage.

However, we do have a formal appeals procedure. For an appeal, your detailed written comments explaining your reasons as to why you consider the referees comments to be unjustified, along with a copy of the original (unrevised) manuscript and the previous reviewers’ reports, would be sent to a member of the journal’s Editorial Board for consideration.  Please note that the decision of the Editorial Board member would be final. If successful, you would then have the opportunity to submit a revised manuscript addressing all of the reviewers’ comments.

If you wish to go ahead with this process, please let me know as soon as possible and provide a formal letter to the appeal reviewer in response to the original reviewers’ comments.

回复此楼