| 查看: 1494 | 回复: 4 | |||
[交流]
给大家分享elsevier的“据稿的八大原因”，总结得很到位！ 已有3人参与
|
|
链接： http://www.elsevier.com/connect/8-reasons-i-rejected-your-article When a manuscript is submitted to a high-quality scholarly journal, it goes through intense scrutiny — even before it's seen by the editor-in-chief and selected for peer review. At Elsevier, between 30 percent to 50 percent of articles don't even make it to the peer review process. As Editor-in-Chief of Carbon, the international journal of the American Carbon Society, Dr. Peter Thrower experiences this situation first-hand. His advice to authors: "By avoiding these pitfalls, you will save reviewers, editors and staff time and frustration, and ensure that your work is judged by its scientific merit, not mistakes." 1. It fails the technical screening. The article contains elements that are suspected to be plagiarized, or it is currently under review at another journal. (Republishing articles or parts of articles, submitting to one or more journals at the same time or using text or images without permission is not allowed. See our ethical guidelines.) The manuscript is not complete; it may be lacking key elements such as the title, authors, affiliations, keywords, main text, references and all tables and figures). The English is not sufficient for the peer review process, The figures are not complete or are not clear enough to read. The article does not conform to the Guide for Authors for the journal it is submitted to. References are incomplete or very old. 2. It does not fall within the Aims and Scope. For the journal Carbon, the material studied may contain carbon, but is not carbon. The study uses a carbon material but the focus is on something different. There is no new carbon science. 3. It's incomplete. The article contains observations but is not a full study. It discusses findings in relation to some of the work in the field but ignores other important work. 4. The procedures and/or analysis of the data is seen to be defective. The study lacked clear control groups or other comparison metrics. The study did not conform to recognized procedures or methodology that can be repeated. The analysis is not statistically valid or does not follow the norms of the field. 5. The conclusions cannot be justified on the basis of the rest of the paper. The arguments are illogical, unstructured or invalid. The data does not support the conclusions. The conclusions ignore large portions of the literature. 6. It's is simply a small extension of a different paper, often from the same authors. Findings are incremental and do not advance the field. The work is clearly part of a larger study, chopped up to make as many articles as possible. 7. It's incomprehensible. The language, structure, or figures are so poor that the merit can't be assessed. Have a native English speaker read the paper. Even if you ARE a native English speaker. Need help? We offer language services. 8. It's boring. It is archival, incremental or of marginal interest to the field (see point 6). The question behind the work is not of interest in the field. The work is not of interest to the readers of the specific journals. |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
面上本子正文33页，违规吗？会被低分嘛？
已经有13人回复
-
评审有感
已经有23人回复
-
提交了我也来说说感想
已经有6人回复
-
Sci. Bull. 悲剧经验
已经有7人回复
-
今年审到国自然15份，谈谈感受
已经有20人回复
-
国自然评分
已经有4人回复
-
反应很差，大量原料没有反应
已经有6人回复
-
如果工作了想读博，可以边工作边读全日制嘛？
已经有5人回复
-
如何实现卤原子转化
已经有8人回复
-
河北省自然科学基金
已经有3人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- Elsevier(SCI) 投稿要求翻译总结
已经有28人回复
yuguiyan
至尊木虫 (文坛精英)
- 应助: 277 (大学生)
- 金币: 15912.3
- 散金: 451
- 红花: 78
- 沙发: 433
- 帖子: 21986
- 在线: 2078.9小时
- 虫号: 2029722
- 注册: 2012-09-25
- 专业: 原子和分子物理
2楼2014-10-23 00:04:57
3楼2014-10-23 00:45:53
自私的猫1988
荣誉版主 (文坛精英)
- 应助: 4800 (副教授)
- 贵宾: 6.746
- 金币: 50040.4
- 散金: 11517
- 红花: 256
- 沙发: 134
- 帖子: 11684
- 在线: 1473.7小时
- 虫号: 2004083
- 注册: 2012-09-16
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 有机分子功能材料化学
- 管辖: 论文投稿
4楼2014-10-23 09:42:58
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
5楼2014-10-23 10:30:35
5