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

slyang2005

木虫 (正式写手)

应助: 1 (幼儿园)
金币: 2941.8
散金: 404
红花: 5
帖子: 360
在线: 600小时
虫号: 538371
注册: 2008-04-02
性别: GG
专业: 科技管理与政策

[交流] 结果是拒稿还是大修？已有23人参与

稿了个国外的SSCI期刊，11天就有回复了。

Refereeing for this manuscript has been completed.

The referees conclude that this is an interesting paper, and the results should
be published. However, in its present form, the paper is unsuitable for
publication in XXX(期刊名).

In brief, they comment that the main findings of the paper - XXXXXXX （篇名）- while novel, is not sufficiently
original or interesting in itself to justify a full paper in XXX（期刊名）.

They recommend that either (1) the results be presented as a short
communication, or (2) the analysis and discussion be extended considerably, and
a rewritten paper submitted.
The full comments of the referees are given in the attached file.

best wishes

请帮忙看一下，还有没有希望？

[ Last edited by slyang2005 on 2010-4-24 at 18:13 ]

回复此楼

» 猜你喜欢

1楼 2010-04-24 18:00:13

已阅回复此楼关注TA 给TA发消息送TA红花 TA的回帖

slyang2005

木虫 (正式写手)

应助: 1 (幼儿园)
金币: 2941.8
散金: 404
红花: 5
帖子: 360
在线: 600小时
虫号: 538371
注册: 2008-04-02
性别: GG
专业: 科技管理与政策

多谢各位的解答。

重新扩充内容来是比较麻烦，而且还涉及一些数学规律模型的解释。

具体附件内的评审意见有两个，其中第一个内容较多，其中有一段是“ In order
to be publishable, the proposed paper would have to do more than just
show a power law fit. It would have to provide more explanation and analysis, which might require more data.
Alternatively it could be rewritten as a short paper, which would certainly be publishable, though in a different journal.
”
而第二个评审意见很简单，可能是编辑自己写的：
“A second referee agrees, and adds:
The results are indeed novel but not sufficiently novel (in the sense of interesting and useful) to be publishable in JD.
”