应《网络安全法》要求，自2017年10月1日起，未进行实名认证将不得使用互联网跟帖服务。为保障您的帐号能够正常使用，请尽快对帐号进行手机号验证，感谢您的理解与支持！

24小时热门版块排行榜    

CyRhmU.jpeg
小木虫论坛-学术科研互动平台 » 学术交流区 » 论文投稿 » 投稿求助 » SSCI大修后再送另一审稿人被拒，请大家帮看一下意见
331/4返回列表1234下一页
查看: 5499  |  回复: 32
只看楼主@他人 存档 新回复提醒 (忽略) 收藏    在APP中查看

hql1974

银虫 (小有名气)

[求助] SSCI大修后再送另一审稿人被拒，请大家帮看一下意见

是SSCI，第一次审稿人(一位)给的大修。今日编辑回复拒稿了。 毕业要延期了。 大家帮看一下。仔细回复了上个审稿人的意见，原想没问题的，最不可能的料想却发生了。

It is my understanding that this paper has been returned with amendments to the journal.  I have seen the list of corrections made and the final draft of the paper.  I have been asked to make a decision on the publishability of this paper.

This is actually quite an interesting research topic, although it is presented in a very poor manner.

First, let me comment on the language.  The paper is no where near publishable standard in an English language journal.  There are many errors of all sorts.  I am unable to list them as there are just too many.  I would suggest that the paper should have been reviewed by an English language expert before being submitted to an English language journal.  The competition for space in an English language academic journal is intense, and the language has to be near-perfect if the paper is to be seriously considered. The editor can made some changes, but not as many as appear in this paper.

The second problem is the organization.  The paper is a bit of a jumble.  We have an introduction with some literature review, then a brief section on research methodology, then some more literature review.  Re-organize and get the different parts sorted out.

The research methodology is inadequate.  We are told that a survey was done in 3 towns, but there is not explanation about how the 652 respondents were chosen, or what they were asked, or how the survey was carried out.  This is important as otherwise it is impossible for the reader to judge the merit and reliability of the survey.  Were random means chosen to select the respondents?  How were they identified?

Much of the explanation is inadequate.  The term 'hometown' is thrown around quite loosely.  It appears in the Highlights, in Table 1 and elsewhere, yet it is difficult to find a very precise definition of what the author means by this term.

Table 3 is a very uninteresting way to present the results.  Also, what justification is there to express the percentages in the results in hundredths of one per cent, especially when the survey itself is less than 1000 respondents?  Tenths is the best you can do.

Finally, what are the policy implications of the research?  This appears to be just a survey, and description of the results, an application of some statistical results that are poorly presented, and that is all.  What is the point of the research if one cannot change things for the better?

Although there is promise here, this paper is so far away from publishable standard that I can only recommend rejection at this stage.
回复此楼

» 收录本帖的淘帖专辑推荐

论文投稿交流的收集

» 猜你喜欢

» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
1楼2013-03-22 16:53:21
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
回帖置顶 ( 共有1个 )

guershao

至尊木虫 (职业作家)

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★ ★ ★ ★
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
avast2009: 回帖置顶 2013-03-23 18:25:21
avast2009: 金币+5, 鼓励高质量应助 2013-03-23 18:25:46
1. 语法需要大的修改，找老板、英语好的人或者老外帮你修改一下语法，其实只要认真改过一次之后，以后都不存在这个问题了；
2. 文章的结构安排不合理，要前后有逻辑，首先是提出问题，然后提出研究假设等...
3. 方法方面存在欠缺，或者是没有解释清楚的问题，要交代清楚，或者有文献进行佐证。
4. 人文社科的论文，要上升到政策层面，对关注相关问题层面的人提出相关的政策建议或者对策，或者你是研究的升华。
赞一下(1人) 回复此楼

» 本帖已获得的红花（最新10朵）

hql1974
本来无一物，何处惹尘埃。
5楼2013-03-22 19:38:14
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
普通回帖

jiaodian
2楼2013-03-22 18:13:40
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

sunpingli

金虫 (小有名气)

不知道

【答案】应助回帖

感谢参与，应助指数 +1
你要好好修改  语言是大问题，最好送去修改，然后就是你写的不太明了，好多地方都没写清楚，你看看影响因子高一点的论文，看看人家都写了什么，什么需要描述，多看几篇好论文，考虑全面一点，再投这个杂志也可以

[ 发自手机版 http://muchong.com/3g ]
赞一下 回复此楼
我就是我
3楼2013-03-22 19:06:06
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

happy617

新虫 (著名写手)

【答案】应助回帖

感谢参与，应助指数 +1
问题不少，还是好好修改吧。估计你投的期刊if不会低。可以认真读读上面的的文章
赞一下 回复此楼
4楼2013-03-22 19:24:11
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

mikefallon

木虫 (小有名气)

【答案】应助回帖

感谢参与，应助指数 +1
审稿人写的已经比较明确了，论文要讨论的主题，也就是文章内容还是比较感兴趣的，但是英语表达、文章结构、规范用语、图表组织、直到最后结论分析都有问题。
好好改一下吧，改完了找一个英语大牛再重点改改英语，重新投这个杂志或者其他杂志，还是很有希望发表的。
赞一下 回复此楼
6楼2013-03-22 19:42:38
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

lqingh506

铁杆木虫 (知名作家)
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
avast2009: 应助指数-1, 非应助请不要选择应助回帖，提醒一次 2013-03-23 18:26:06
楼主好好改改，加油
赞一下 回复此楼
7楼2013-03-22 19:55:49
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

hql1974

银虫 (小有名气)
谢谢各位虫友的解析，感激。大修改后自己和老师都较满意(原想会令上个审稿人满意)，不料又送了另一审稿人定夺，唉，挺受打击的。纽结编辑怎么没再给改的机会呢，自己觉得文章已改的可以了。挺无奈的。
再请教一下：Table 3 is a very uninteresting way to present the results.  Also, what justification is there to express the percentages in the results in hundredths of one per cent, especially when the survey itself is less than 1000 respondents?  Tenths is the best you can do.
我用到535个样本，回归显著性这样标不可以吗？ Notes: *

赞一下 回复此楼
8楼2013-03-22 20:05:40
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

mlanqiang

木虫之王 (文学泰斗)

蓝博士
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
avast2009: 应助指数-1, 非应助请不要选择应助回帖，提醒一次 2013-03-23 18:26:24
问题很多啊，还是下来好好改吧。
赞一下 回复此楼
蓝精灵
9楼2013-03-22 20:11:59
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

hql1974

银虫 (小有名气)
引用回帖:
6楼: Originally posted by mikefallon at 2013-03-22 19:42:38
审稿人写的已经比较明确了，论文要讨论的主题，也就是文章内容还是比较感兴趣的，但是英语表达、文章结构、规范用语、图表组织、直到最后结论分析都有问题。
好好改一下吧，改完了找一个英语大牛再重点改改英语，重 ...

谢谢相助，感觉到小木虫的温暖。努力修改。
赞一下 回复此楼
10楼2013-03-22 21:53:32
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
相关版块跳转 我要订阅楼主 hql1974 的主题更新
331/4返回列表1234下一页
普通表情 龙 兔 虎 猫
信息提示
关闭
请填处理意见
关闭