投了SCI小修后被拒,想問下可以不可以發(fā)郵件給編輯申訴
剛開始給我的小修意見很好:“The referee(s) have recommended publication, but also suggest some minor revisions to your manuscript. Therefore, I invite you to respond to the referee(s)' comments and revise your manuscript.”
但是小修后感覺重新外審換了一個審稿人:
“Unfortunately there are already numerous studies that use robotic equipment; mostly a robotic arm; to facilitate the use of the study of technology in educational and academic environments. A quick search of the IEEE database will give you a large number of references in this regard.
From a novelty point of view, your study does nothing more than insist on it, but it does not contribute anything new that modifies or improves what already exists.
In recent years, the use of IoT technology has been linked to these experiences, with which your paper does not contribute anything new in that sense either.
For this reason I must advise to reject your paper.”
我覺得我搞了半年時間,而且已經(jīng)小修了,怎么會出現(xiàn)完全不同的審稿意見,想問下這種情況可以找編輯申訴嗎?
返回小木蟲查看更多
京公網(wǎng)安備 11010802022153號
我也有碰到這種情況,可以找主編argue,但是到底能不能接受就看主編啦
潞脙脽脮脨祿脨祿祿脴賂麓攏盧脧毛脦脢脛煤脧脗攏盧脮芒賂枚脡錨脣脽脨貓脪陋賂酶脰梅鹵脿路壟脫脢錄鎂脗冒攏盧脫茂脝酶脫婁賂脙脭玫脙麓脣碌攏盧脦脪脨麓脕脣賂枚脫脢錄鎂賂脨戮玫脩爐脦脢脦陋脢虜脙麓脟擄潞貿(mào)脡貿(mào)賂氓脪芒錄沒虜?shù)撁挼撁懨姑娒囂數(shù)撁娒囂數(shù)撁帽脙虜攏盧祿貌脮脽脫茂脝酶脤蘆脰脴攏?br>,
祝福
“From a novelty point of view, your study does nothing more than insist on it, but it does not contribute anything new that modifies or improves what already exists.”可以 Argue, 但你得找出強有力的證據(jù)反駁該審稿意見,否則就只能改投它刊
IEEE數(shù)據(jù)庫 記載太多相關(guān) 這個是硬傷
可以argue,但是似乎成功率不高,我身邊的幾個人argue,最后都不怎么搭理的,最好同時找好的可以轉(zhuǎn)投的期刊
可能性不大。審稿意見說你的文章沒有創(chuàng)新性,對比之前的研究沒有任何的改進,此種情況可以直接拒稿。