24小时热门版块排行榜

>导师招生 (263)
>论坛更新日志 (246)
>找工作 (87)
>考博 (71)
>博后之家 (70)
>虫友互识 (53)
>论文投稿 (51)
>职场人生 (50)
>考研 (41)
>医学 (40)
>招聘信息布告栏 (20)
>有机交流 (20)
>休闲灌水 (17)
>教师之家 (10)
>签证指南 (1)
>标准与专利 (1)

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

无雪之冬

木虫 (正式写手)

应助: 13 (小学生)
金币: 2920.1
帖子: 316
在线: 594.7小时
虫号: 515901

[交流] 审稿意见，大家给些建议啊

一篇文章，之前投到Nanoscale，两个审稿人一小修接受一个要求动物实验建议拒稿重投，编辑给了重投，修改重投后原来的那个审稿人还是坚持要补动物实验并给了大修，结果编辑拒稿，泪。后来把修改稿投到了一个3分左右的收费杂志，晕，审稿意见比之前还多...其中对第二个审稿人的意见有几个问题想请大家给些意见。1，他的态度，是积极的么？2，我的文章是Results和discussion在一起写的，投的杂志很多也那么写，他貌似让分开写，要是那么整的话文章基本要重写了，有些不太想重写。希望大家给些建议。

审稿意见如下：

REVIEWER 2 EVALUATION

Overall this paper has much to comment it. However I was disappointed that there was a lack of numerical data given in the results section, any reader has to depend on the figures, this needs to be rectified. In addition the results would benefit from and be much tighter if the discussion was removed and placed with the conclusions in a combined discussion/conclusions section. Finally the figure legends should be more expansive and stand on their own and not be dependant on the body of the text to support their interpretation.

回复此楼