| 查看: 3310 | 回复: 34 | |||
| 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 | |||
striveme铁杆木虫 (正式写手)
|
[交流]
谁见过这样的审稿意见？ 已有26人参与
|
||
|
最近的一篇投稿，得到的审稿意见如下，编辑让major reversion，各位大神给点建议.怎么个搞法？ Dear Prof. XXX: Thank you for submitting your manuscript for publication in The XXX. It has been examined by expert reviewers who have concluded that the work is of potential interest to the readership of The XXX; however, it appears that a major revision, possibly followed by further reviewer evaluation, will be needed prior to its further consideration for publication. Please see the enclosed reviewers' reports for details regarding the requested changes and/or additions. ------------------------------------ Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author: Reviewer: 1 Recommendation: This paper is not recommended because it does not provide new physical insights. Comments: The authors studied XXX. The group has used this method to study polymer chains in solutions. Now they switched to small surfactant molecules. Such a system has been well studied in colloidal research. The method is a commercial instrument. I do not see that a combination of this system and this method has led us anything new. Yes, they did lots of measurement and summarize their results into some figures. That’s it! This is a simple laboratory report, not a scientific paper. Where are sciences? My guess is that these two authors just try to publish one more paper. Reviewer: 2 Recommendation: This paper represents a significant new contribution and should be published as is. Comments: This is a timely report that contains high-quality experimental data and appropriate interpretation. There are very few papers dealing with the kinetics transitions and this is an excellent contribution to the field of self-assembly. I recommend publication in XXX without any changes. |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
退学或坚持读
已经有18人回复
-
免疫学博士有名额，速联系
已经有13人回复
-
面上基金申报没有其他的参与者成吗
已经有4人回复
-
国家基金申请书模板内插入图片不可调整大小?
已经有8人回复
-
多组分精馏求助
已经有6人回复
-
国家级人才课题组招收2026年入学博士
已经有6人回复
yangkee
铁杆木虫 (职业作家)
- 应助: 21 (小学生)
- 金币: 13133.8
- 散金: 5415
- 红花: 5
- 帖子: 3242
- 在线: 295.2小时
- 虫号: 1043579
- 注册: 2010-06-18
- 专业: 水工结构和材料及施工
★
小木虫(金币+0.5):给个红包，谢谢回帖交流
小木虫(金币+0.5):给个红包，谢谢回帖交流
|
跟我碰到的情况类似，投了Journal A，审稿人也是一个拒，一个接受。不过主编给了拒。 Reviewer A: The paper does not present *** as suggested in the title and in the summary. …… Suggestion: reorganise the paper, improve English and submit paper as a numerical analysis of ***. Reviewer B: The contribution to *** provided in this paper is, in my opinion, quite interesting. So called ***, ……, where they represent a methodological novelty as far as I know. This paper is well written, clearly and without misprints, in good English. Therefore, I recommend acceptance for publication in Journal B. 根据Reviewer B意见里的参考文献查了一下，是某不认识的大牛，是Journal B的编辑。Journal A的主编也是Journal B的主编。正在认真修改中，争取一举拿下。 |
15楼2010-09-11 11:41:05
3楼2010-09-11 10:28:30
4楼2010-09-11 10:32:19
polestar007
至尊木虫 (职业作家)
- 应助: 0 (幼儿园)
- 贵宾: 0.42
- 金币: 17388.8
- 红花: 5
- 帖子: 3952
- 在线: 1099.4小时
- 虫号: 439293
- 注册: 2007-10-10
- 专业: 胶体与界面化学
5楼2010-09-11 10:37:47