24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 5213  |  回复: 27
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

mlshmily

木虫 (著名写手)

[交流] Revise-大修还是小修?第二个审稿人什么意思?已有14人参与

收到Elsevier期刊的审稿意见:Revise。
但不知道大修还是小修,似乎是Elsevier的审稿意见模板。好像是修改重投,是新投稿吗?
另外,第二个审稿人什么意思?有人说比较危险,他是拒审的意思,可能因为论文太差了。
还有戏吗?
请明白人点拨一二。谢谢!

Dear XXXX,

The reviewers have commented on your above paper. They indicated that it is not acceptable for publication in its present form. However, if you feel that you can suitably address the reviewers' comments (included below), the Editor In Chief invites you to revise and resubmit your manuscript.

Please carefully address the issues raised in the comments.

If you are submitting a revised manuscript, please also:
a) outline each change made (point by point) as raised in the reviewer comments
AND/OR
b) provide a suitable rebuttal to each reviewer comment not addressed

Yours sincerely,

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer #1: I think this manuscript addressed an interesting and potentially promising topic. Also, it is obvious that the authors did an extensive search on the existing reports and research literature. However, I feel that this paper have some areas that need to be addressed.

First, I disagree with the authors' organization of contents……...

Second, …….

Third, the paper should shorten the section on …….

Fourth, ……

Finally, the writing in some sections can be improved (e.g., the last paragraph in page 3).

I hope the authors find the review helpful and wish them good luck with their research in this area.

Reviewer #2: The work is interesting but I wasn't convinced that the discussion or conclusions achieved that much apart from saying the obvious. I did like the way the discussion drew down data from a number of sources thus providing an uninformed reader with a range of good background facts and figures. I would have preferred to see more ambition in the paper's aim. There are many minor errors - often the definite article is missed out, quite a number of spelling errors, some references are very old yet are used to support current understanding. These all need attention. I thought the sources of data were in need of more care. There are other sources that are probably better than some that are mentioned.
回复此楼
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

melon134

银虫 (初入文坛)


小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包,谢谢回帖
引用回帖:
10楼: Originally posted by mlshmily at 2014-02-05 11:18:00
谢谢。稿件状态显示:revise...

major revision and resubmit ...应该这样的...
18楼2014-02-06 12:51:10
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 28 个回答

Fung66

木虫 (著名写手)


小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包,谢谢回帖
有戏,但不是大修或小修,可以说是reject,是让你修改后重投。第二个审稿人不是拒审,他看出文章很多问题,如不认同你得出结论的方法,有很多小错误,引用文献太老,这些问题需要修改。

[ 发自手机版 http://muchong.com/3g ]
纯粹为了学术。纯粹为了出国。加油。
2楼2014-02-05 00:08:48
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

miingbo

新虫 (初入文坛)


小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包,谢谢回帖
我觉得审稿人2认为你的研究方向是好的,但是怀疑你的研究结论:“wasn't convinced that ……achieved that much apart from saying the obvious.”
除此之外,两个审稿人都认为文章逻辑结构以及语言存在很大的问题。
我觉得你是不是推理过程不足以支撑你的结论,有点言过其实了,直白说就是有点吹了
这个真要好好的改一改,先饱满点增加工作量把问题阐述清楚,然后再组织逻辑结构,最后改语言吧

[ 发自手机版 http://muchong.com/3g ]
3楼2014-02-05 00:16:54
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

kingki

至尊木虫 (知名作家)


小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包,谢谢回帖
增加工作量把问题阐述清楚,组织逻辑结构,改语言
飞越无限
4楼2014-02-05 00:22:54
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
普通表情 高级回复(可上传附件)
信息提示
请填处理意见