| 查看: 5900 | 回復(fù): 12 | |||
[交流]
ssci2區(qū)投稿現(xiàn)收到大修,請(qǐng)各位友友幫忙看看呀! 已有7人參與
|
|||
|
兩月初投的ssci 6.2給回復(fù)了 7月14日前上傳文件。 第一次投稿啊,還是自己一個(gè)在做學(xué)術(shù),沒有團(tuán)隊(duì),所以跪求友友們幫我看看給給意見! (第一次寫稿不一定圖片可以加進(jìn)來,所以把審稿意見等文字版本發(fā)出來了 Referee: 1 Comments to the Author This manuscript studies the impact of two forms of government innovation assistance programs - innovation subsidies and tax refunds - on the R&D production of Chinese pharmaceutical companies. This is a very interesting research topic for us. The study tests a number of hypotheses and draws conclusions through quantitative analysis. However, I would like to see more concrete raw data on the quantitative analysis. Otherwise, I do not find it very convincing. I would also like to see a specific discussion of the differences from previous studies. I believe the paper will be even better if you do so. More specifically, I am worried about the following points. (1) The authors present many hypotheses which are H1a, H1b, H2a, H2b, H3a, H3b, H4a, and H4b and analyze them quantitatively. The variable definitions and descriptive statistics are listed in Table1 and Table2 and the regression results for each model are shown the Table 3, Table 4, Table 5, Table 6, and Table 7. These results are then used to test the hypotheses and draw conclusions. However, the actual contents of Table1 and Table2 are black boxes, and there is no way to verify them. Also, there seems to be no explanation of the model from 1 to 4. (2) Also, regarding the INPI that means the total number of patents in Table 1, the results are not compared and discussed with those of Cappelen et al. (2012) and Moretti and Wilson (2014), which are cited as previous studies. There is no crucial discussion of how the current results in China differ from the results in those other countries and also the reason why in this manuscript. I cannot make an accurate judgment because I lack the materials to make a solid decision. Referee: 2 Comments to the Author Dear Author(s), Overall paper is very well written and meets the required standards. However, a few suggestions are put forward to make its worth reading. 1. Abstract: A paragraph on methodology can make it a comprehensive abstract. 2. Literature review should be updated with a few recent papers i.e. 2020-21 3. Methodology: Page 09, line 36, 'Special Treatment (ST*) need to be defined in comprehensive way for the readers. 4. Moderator: page 11, The author(s) should clearly explain the time line and technique used to collect the primary data. 5. VIF threshold reference is missing. Author(s) may consider to provide even conservative reference due to given results. 6. It was observed that Author(s) have used different styles of result reporting, it may be uniformed with providing beta value and p-values i.e. page 17, line 55-60 7. Discussion and Conclusion: Author(s) must add some references in (Point-2) to strengthen the discussion part as provided in the same section i.e. (1 and 3) 8. Page 30, line 47, I guess it must be competitiveness rather than 'competitive' 9. In my opinion, a separate section on limitations and future research directions can make study worth reading. Editor的主要傾向是:You will see that although the referees find some merit in the paper it is required that substantial revisions be done before we can consider it further. Nevertheless, we do hope that you will be able to undertake the additional work on the paper and look forward to receiving a revised manuscript in due course. 很惶恐!主編的意思是能不能中呢?還有Referee: 1在說的black boxes 是啥意思?是在說我的數(shù)據(jù)論證不清晰么?還是在覺得我數(shù)據(jù)不真實(shí)呢?? 球球了 幫我給點(diǎn)意見吧。。! 比心 |
金蟲 (正式寫手)
至尊木蟲 (知名作家)
|
編輯是持積極態(tài)度的,但你需要讓審稿人1信服你的數(shù)據(jù),目前來看他覺得很難判斷你的數(shù)據(jù)真實(shí)性!最簡(jiǎn)單的方法就是附上原始數(shù)據(jù) 發(fā)自小木蟲IOS客戶端 |
新蟲 (正式寫手)
禁言 (初入文壇)
|
本帖內(nèi)容被屏蔽 |
鐵桿木蟲 (知名作家)
AP

金蟲 (著名寫手)
| 最具人氣熱帖推薦 [查看全部] | 作者 | 回/看 | 最后發(fā)表 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 313求調(diào)劑 +3 | 肆叁貳壹22 2026-03-19 | 3/150 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 材料工程(專)一志愿985 初試335求調(diào)劑 +3 | hiloiy 2026-03-17 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 求調(diào)劑 +3 | Ma_xt 2026-03-17 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 307求調(diào)劑 +10 | 冷笙123 2026-03-17 | 10/500 |
|
|
[考研] 354求調(diào)劑 +5 | Tyoumou 2026-03-18 | 8/400 |
|
|
[考研] 304求調(diào)劑 +6 | 曼殊2266 2026-03-18 | 6/300 |
|
|
[考研] 材料專業(yè)求調(diào)劑 +6 | hanamiko 2026-03-18 | 6/300 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿武漢理工材料工程專碩調(diào)劑 +9 | Doleres 2026-03-19 | 9/450 |
|
|
[考研] 085600材料與化工 +8 | 安全上岸! 2026-03-16 | 8/400 |
|
|
[考研] 286分人工智能專業(yè)請(qǐng)求調(diào)劑愿意跨考! +3 | lemonzzn 2026-03-17 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 266求調(diào)劑 +5 | 陽陽哇塞 2026-03-14 | 10/500 |
|
|
[考研] 328求調(diào)劑,英語六級(jí)551,有科研經(jīng)歷 +4 | 生物工程調(diào)劑 2026-03-16 | 12/600 |
|
|
[考研] 0703化學(xué) 305求調(diào)劑 +4 | FY_yy 2026-03-14 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 302求調(diào)劑 +10 | 呼呼呼。。。。 2026-03-17 | 10/500 |
|
|
[考研] 生物學(xué)071000 329分求調(diào)劑 +3 | 我愛生物生物愛?/a> 2026-03-17 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 304求調(diào)劑 +5 | 素年祭語 2026-03-15 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 070305求調(diào)劑 +3 | mlpqaz03 2026-03-14 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 085601材料工程315分求調(diào)劑 +3 | yang_0104 2026-03-15 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 289求調(diào)劑 +4 | 這么名字咋樣 2026-03-14 | 6/300 |
|
|
[考研] 297一志愿上交085600求調(diào)劑 +5 | 指尖八千里 2026-03-14 | 5/250 |
|