本文摘要:sci論文提交后經過評審往往有大修、小修的結果,大修說明問題較為嚴重,返修論文大多還要再交給審稿人重新審查,以確定問題是否得到了解決并且沒有新的修改意見。今天在這里介紹 sci論文大修常見的四種情況 ,作者可作為了解: 01主要論點不明確: 一些手稿符合一般學
sci論文提交后經過評審往往有大修、小修的結果,大修說明問題較為嚴重,返修論文大多還要再交給審稿人重新審查,以確定問題是否得到了解決并且沒有新的修改意見。今天在這里介紹sci論文大修常見的四種情況,作者可作為了解:
01主要論點不明確:
一些手稿符合一般學術標準并得出了有趣的結論,但關鍵信息沒有得到充分闡述。一份優秀的文稿應該在提出明確論點的同時,包含清晰的核心信息。編輯Comments舉例:“The authors of this manuscript have an ambitious objective and draw on an interesting dataset. However, their main argument is unclear. ”“The key argument needs to be worked out and formulated much more clearly. ”
02理論框架需完善:
那些忽略了相關文獻或重要理論的理論框架可能是不完整的,這類文稿提出了有前途但尚未完善的理論框架,通常會被期刊編輯要求進行“大修訂”。編輯Comments舉例:
“The theoretical framework is promising but incomplete. In my opinion, the authors cannot make their current claims without considering writings on…”
“In the Introduction section, the authors have merely mentioned more than 20 references without conducting a detailed literature analysis. Moreover, the research results of the last two years in the references have not been considered. Hence, the authors should make efforts to improve both the Introduction and the literature review. ”
03需要加強證據支持:
手稿應該提出清晰的論點,學術期刊甚至歡迎具有挑戰性的觀點。然而,這些觀點必須得到令人信服的證據支持。在某些手稿中,這些證據不足,需要更詳細的信息、計算、示例、圖表或引用來支持。“I encourage the authors to provide more in-depth evidence. For instance, I would like to see more interview quotes and a more transparent statistical analysis. ”“The empirical evidence is at times insufficient to support the authors’ claims. For instance, in section…”
04部分不合邏輯或不清晰:
文稿中的一些部分或段落難以理解,作者需要將其刪除、重新排序或重寫。手稿中存在過多的結構問題通常會導致“修改后重新提交”的決定。編輯Comments舉例:“In summary, theoretical aspects should be added before specific applications, e.g. ... These would strengthen the reliability of your conclusions and arise broad interest. ”“I believe the authors should add a more detailed explanation of their theoretical results.”NO.3
審稿人給出上述意見的話,作者就要認真修改自己的論文,同行評審專家和編輯確定文章需要進行大規模的修訂(Resubmit for review /Major revisions),并必須再次經歷同行審查流程,作者就要引起重視,按照要求及時的修改。
轉載請注明來自發表學術論文網:http://www.zpfmc.com/gwsci/30927.html