| 查看: 7056 | 回复: 45 | |||
| 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 | |||
[求助]
文章被拒了，两个审稿人意见完全相反，值得申诉么？
|
|||
|
文章被拒了，一个审稿人认为目前的工作是别人之前工作的延伸，缺乏足够新意，另外一个审稿人说不用修改，可以发表，编辑说稿件太多就拒了。值得申诉么？ 以下是编辑的拒稿的信和审稿人意见 Dear XXXX Thank you for your submission of XXXX and for the above-mentioned Communication. We are unfortunately unable to accept your manuscript for publication in CHEMISTRY - A EUROPEAN JOURNAL. Since considerably more Communications are received than we can possibly publish in the limited available space, a selection process has to be applied. In the course of this an article is first assessed whether it fits into the journal猀 program, whether it is likely to attract the attention of a wider readership, and whether its scientific quality is very high. In view of the fact that we can only accept the upper 40% of papers submitted we return all manuscripts to the authors immediately once we receive an outspoken negative report, particularly when the initial editorial assessment considered the content of the paper to be more suitable for a specialized journal. We are sorry to have to disappoint you but trust that you will understand our decision based on this policy. This fast reaction should allow to submit your manuscript as early as possible to another journal. Please note that one should only appeal against such decisions when a great factual error in the referee report seems to be the basis for the decision. An appeal will not be considered if it is "only" a difference of opinion. Sincerely yours, Dr. Lobat Doostdar Associate Editor ____________________________ Referee 1: Importance: C) less important Hypotheses Yes/No: Yes Appropriate Length: Yes Different Journal: Asian Journal of Organic Chemistry Recommend Acceptance: D) No *) Referee Letter: The manuscript describes a XXXX based fluorescent probe for XXX. The work is an extension of Prof. XXX work (ref. 8). In this study, they studied XXX dyes that emit at longer wavelengths. The XXX derivatives are also based on known dyes. Although they emit at 620-643 nm, a NIR probe emitting at longer wavelength (~800 nm) is already reported by Prof. XXXX Neither useful information nor novel concept is provided in this work. Therefore, I do not recommend its publication in this journal. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Referee 2: This is a clean report that describes a red-shifted XXX fluorescent probe for XXX detection. The wavelength of excitation is useful for common 594 nm laser lines, and appropriate spectroscopic and cell imaging controls have been performed. I recommend publication without change to the science, only that one other relevant review on XXX probes be cited in the introduction that covers some aspects of the XXXX --------------------------------------------------------------------------- +++++++++++++ |
回复此楼» 收录本帖的淘帖专辑推荐
 论文发表 |
» 猜你喜欢
售SCI一区文章，我:8.O.55.1.O.54,科目齐全,可伽急
已经有4人回复
-
售SCI一区文章，我:8.O.55.1.O.54,科目齐全,可伽急
已经有5人回复
-
售SCI文章，我:8O5.5.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急
已经有3人回复
-
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8O.55.1.O.54,科目全,可伽急
已经有3人回复
-
售SCI文章，我:8O5.5.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急
已经有3人回复
-
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8O.55.1.O.54,科目全,可伽急
已经有3人回复
-
售SCI一区文章，我:8.O.551.O.5.4,科目全,可伽急
已经有4人回复
-
售SCI-T0P文章，我:8O.5.5.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急
已经有4人回复
-
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8.O.55.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急
已经有3人回复
-
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8O.55.1.O.5.4,科目齐全,可+急
已经有6人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- 申诉信怎么写？论文被不良审稿人错误评论，而且很简短，最后给了reject建议。
已经有15人回复
- journal of optics 两个审稿人意见结论如下，有必要申诉么？
已经有7人回复
- 审稿人的意见比较水，可以向主编申诉否？
已经有23人回复
- 论文大修后审稿人认为我没有认真修改被拒，想写申诉信，怎么写比较合适
已经有5人回复
- 补充下审稿意见，大家看看JACS申诉胜算多大？？
已经有15人回复
- 收到JACS审稿意见， 据稿要申诉么？？？
已经有58人回复
- 俩审稿意见，一个指出语法错误，不提接收否，另一个没看懂，可以申述吗
已经有3人回复
- 审稿人要求大修，却被编辑给拒了，是否可以申诉？
已经有15人回复
- J. Power Sources 审稿意见一个同意一个拒绝，麻烦大家看看，有必要申诉吗
已经有8人回复
- Angewandte Chemie悲剧，两个审稿人意见都是修改，改投还是申诉啊？
已经有9人回复
- 不负责任的主编 + 不负责任的审稿人 申诉纠结中
已经有16人回复
- 投稿Langmuir，审稿人都说可以发表，编辑拒稿，这种情况有必要申诉吗？
已经有10人回复
- 审稿人说大修，但是论文被拒，给编辑再发邮件申诉有用吗 7.19 更新
已经有30人回复
- 投出一篇文章，一个审稿人同意，一个不同意。我想申诉，求教
已经有11人回复
- 推荐的一个审稿人明显让他的学生来审稿，意见直接影响编辑决定，有必要申诉吗
已经有18人回复
- 一个审稿人的意见太荒唐,如何申述?格式?
已经有21人回复
googleuboy
木虫 (知名作家)
- 应助: 747 (博后)
- 金币: 3118.8
- 散金: 4149
- 红花: 36
- 帖子: 6906
- 在线: 760.6小时
- 虫号: 1810740
- 注册: 2012-05-11
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 结构工程
【答案】应助回帖
★ ★
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
esub: 金币+2, 鼓励认真应助 2012-12-12 09:26:30
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
esub: 金币+2, 鼓励认真应助 2012-12-12 09:26:30
| 有没有必要申诉你自己可以考虑一下，你觉得你的工作是不是别人之前的延伸？如果回答是，你就另投它刊吧，因为主编也是这样认为的。另外一个审稿人说不用修改，可以发表，个人觉得，这样的评论也许没不能真正反映你文章的水平，因为真正好的不用做任何修改就接受的文章实在是太少太少了，大概1%左右吧，除非你自己也觉得你的文章就属于这1%，否则你也没必要申诉了，因为主编对reviewer 2的评论不完全赞成才导致他做了据搞的决定。所以你自己可以考虑考虑，有没有必要去申诉的。 |
9楼2012-12-11 21:30:49
nono2009
超级版主 (文学泰斗)
No gains, no pains.
-
专家经验: +21105 - SEPI: 10
- 应助: 28684 (院士)
- 贵宾: 513.911
- 金币: 2555230
- 散金: 27828
- 红花: 2148
- 沙发: 66666
- 帖子: 1602255
- 在线: 65200.9小时
- 虫号: 827383
- 注册: 2009-08-13
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 工程热物理与能源利用
- 管辖: 科研家筹备委员会
2楼2012-12-11 19:35:46
fzg66666
铁杆木虫 (职业作家)
- 应助: 208 (大学生)
- 金币: 7446.2
- 散金: 10
- 红花: 5
- 帖子: 4526
- 在线: 184.2小时
- 虫号: 1048122
- 注册: 2010-06-27
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 非线性光学与量子光学
3楼2012-12-11 19:52:33
4楼2012-12-11 20:12:31
