JBE初審被拒，請(qǐng)大家?guī)兔聪聦徃迦说囊庖?/h1>
第一個(gè)審稿人：While this is a well-written paper, there are some fundamental concerns that I categorise under two major titles: theoretical and methodological.
第二個(gè)審稿人: This paper is interesting. However, below I have some specific comments that might help improve the paper.
第三個(gè)審稿人: The topic and the overall framework are interesting. The paper is well-organized and fairly easy to navigate. However, there are several issues that have severely undermined its contributions to the literature.
雖然拒稿是個(gè)很常見的事情，對(duì)于科研人來說但是還是有點(diǎn)傷心加失落啊。仔細(xì)研究了審稿人的意見，每個(gè)審稿人都提了六七個(gè)問題，但是總體評(píng)價(jià)似乎還算積極的吧？由于是第一次SCI，對(duì)于審稿人評(píng)語不是很明白，比如“well-written”“interesting”對(duì)一篇文章是哪種程度的評(píng)價(jià)？是禮貌用語嗎？
返回小木蟲查看更多
今日熱帖
第一個(gè)審稿人：While this is a well-written paper, there are some fundamental concerns that I categorise under two major titles: theoretical and methodological.
第二個(gè)審稿人: This paper is interesting. However, below I have some specific comments that might help improve the paper.
第三個(gè)審稿人: The topic and the overall framework are interesting. The paper is well-organized and fairly easy to navigate. However, there are several issues that have severely undermined its contributions to the literature.
雖然拒稿是個(gè)很常見的事情，對(duì)于科研人來說但是還是有點(diǎn)傷心加失落啊。仔細(xì)研究了審稿人的意見，每個(gè)審稿人都提了六七個(gè)問題，但是總體評(píng)價(jià)似乎還算積極的吧？由于是第一次SCI，對(duì)于審稿人評(píng)語不是很明白，比如“well-written”“interesting”對(duì)一篇文章是哪種程度的評(píng)價(jià)？是禮貌用語嗎？
返回小木蟲查看更多
京公網(wǎng)安備 11010802022153號(hào)
祝福
前面是禮貌，后面才是重點(diǎn)
一般用“Interesting”是讓你“feel good”. 這是老外的常規(guī)操作，不代表對(duì)文章的態(tài)度。
老外BUT和However以后的才是重點(diǎn)
按照意見修改后再投，還是比較有希望的。說了interesting，說明是有創(chuàng)新的
，
內(nèi)容已刪除