24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 2379  |  回复: 10
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

dragonltp

木虫 (小有名气)

[求助] Macromolecules投稿意见已回

稿件投到macromolecules一个月后,两个reviewer意见今天刚到,但不太理想。想请各位高人指点下,谢谢了!
编辑及审稿意见如下:
editor:
As you will see, both reviewers identify some interesting aspects of the manuscript, but also a number of problems and deficiencies.  Regrettably, their overall comments (including those handwritten on the manuscript itself) do not provide sufficient support for publication in Macromolecules.  As you know, Macromolecules receives a very large number of manuscripts competing for our limited annual page allotment and requires strong support from the reviewers in terms of novelty and impact.

I am sorry that I cannot invite revision and I hope for your understanding.  I also hope that you will find the extensive and thoughtful comments of both reviewers helpful in revising your manuscript for potential submission to a different journal.

Reviewer 1#   
Recommendation: Reconsider after major revisions.

Comments:
The results of this study are interesting and compliment existing literature.  
Overall, this paper seems incremental compared to similar papers in the field and may not be suitable for a high impact journal, such as Macromolecules.
Prior to being published several issues need to be addressed.


Reviewer 2#
Recommendation: Better suited to another journal.

Comments:
The experiments are interesting, the spectral data appear to be of high quality.

The 3rd digit in the percent of ferroelectric phase is probably not significant, since the absorptivity of the vibration bands is reported with only two significant digits.

No summary and conclusions were provided.  (这个可能是编辑发给对方时,没有给全文,以致对方不能看到后半部分包括结论等)

The figures are too small and crowded.

基于上述情况,是否可以按照审稿人的意见去修改,然后argue下重投? 谢谢!
注:审稿人的意见大部分很nice也很responsible。
回复此楼

» 收录本帖的淘帖专辑推荐

国基、SCI投稿精华集 有用的资源-huashuhuai

» 猜你喜欢

» 本主题相关价值贴推荐,对您同样有帮助:

已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

pjstang

木虫 (著名写手)

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★
dragonltp: 金币+2, 有帮助 2013-03-27 21:07:18
引用回帖:
9楼: Originally posted by dragonltp at 2013-03-27 14:18:54
好的,我试试soft matter看。谢谢了!
您觉得reviewer还是选一样的么?我按照他们的意思修改,但有些问题可能很难回答出来。...

审稿人这个问题 看你自己选择了。很难说。
如果碰到同一个审稿人手里,而你又没有修改,总是很不好的。
10楼2013-03-27 15:54:56
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
查看全部 11 个回答

71429

木虫 (著名写手)

第一个认为创新性不够,第二个也认为不适合Macromolecuels.argue也希望不大。
2楼2013-03-26 22:45:44
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

ll9999

专家顾问 (文坛精英)

优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★ ★ ★ ★
感谢参与,应助指数 +1
dragonltp: 金币+2 2013-03-27 07:17:36
dragonltp: 金币+3 2013-03-27 07:18:07
貌似楼上说的对,好好修改吧
3楼2013-03-27 00:01:05
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

pjstang

木虫 (著名写手)

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★
感谢参与,应助指数 +1
dragonltp: 金币+2 2013-03-27 07:18:21
这个希望不是很大。
编辑算客气的了。因为审稿人没有给出很强烈的正面意见,均对创新性等根本性问题表示了负面意见
好好谢谢,改投soft matter等其他杂志
4楼2013-03-27 05:44:01
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
信息提示
请填处理意见