審稿注意事項(xiàng)及看法模板

1、如何正確審稿1、不要由于寫作水平差就隨便拒稿.2、不要成心寫作者沒有做什么實(shí)驗(yàn)或模擬而拒稿.很多人做研究時(shí),都喜歡把問題簡(jiǎn)化,盡量減少干擾因素.只要作者針對(duì)某個(gè)因素進(jìn)行了透徹的研究,千萬(wàn)不能由于沒有考慮某些方面而拒稿.比方做材料研究時(shí),由于很多材料非球形,但做數(shù)值模擬時(shí)為了簡(jiǎn)化,將材料作為球形來研究,只要利用球形得到的結(jié)果真實(shí),有新意,就接受.在審稿意見里建議作者繼續(xù)做非球形材料.3、炒冷飯的一定要拒稿.為了文章數(shù)量,將自己很多發(fā)表了的論文加以整理,沒有任何新的工作的稿子一定要堅(jiān)持拒稿.4、不要嫉妒新人的成果而拒稿.5、不能由于反對(duì)自己的觀點(diǎn)而拒稿.模板：審稿意見Thepaperpresent

2、sanapplicationofreassignedwaveletscalogramforrotorsystemfaultdiagnosis.Itisatopicofinteresttotheresearchersintherelatedareasbutthepaperneedsverysignificantimprovementbeforeacceptanceforpublication.Mydetailedcommentsareasfollows:1. Thewaveletmethod(reassignedwaveletscalogram)usedinthepaperworksverywe

3、llfortheunderlyingfaultdiagnosisproblem.Ontheotherhand,thiswaveletmethodisawell-establishedmethod,andthepresentresearchisadirectapplicationofthismethodwithoutnewcontributioninmethodologicalresearch.2. Fortheabovereason,thepresentationshouldbefocusedontheresults.Unfortunately,thepresentationisfarfrom

4、acceptableforpublication.ThematerialwasnotproperlyorganizedanditisstronglysuggestedthattheauthorscheckcarefullytheEnglishwritingandusestandardterminologiesinthetechnicalarea.3. Thetitleofthepapershouldbemorespecificsincenumerousstudieshavebeendoneonthefaultdiagnosisofrotorsystemsusingwaveletsandtime

5、-frequencymethods.Also,removetheword"research".一般審稿意見至少要包含三條：(1)簡(jiǎn)要描述論文研究?jī)?nèi)容和意義,并作出評(píng)價(jià).對(duì)于其比擬好的局部,要給于肯定.(2)針對(duì)文章中的內(nèi)容和結(jié)果,指出其具體的缺乏之處,并談?wù)勀愕目捶?文章的不足之處有三種層次：第一,論文結(jié)果不正確或有重大失誤；第二,論文缺乏重要的結(jié)果；第三,論文的結(jié)果不夠完善.(3)最后,給出你的綜合評(píng)價(jià),接受,修改,還是拒收.如何審稿評(píng)審花費(fèi)的時(shí)間與審稿質(zhì)量的提升相關(guān),但超過3小時(shí)那么無更大意義.認(rèn)真研讀自己投稿得回的評(píng)審意見,學(xué)習(xí)他人如何審稿.比擬同一稿件自己的審稿意見

6、和其他審稿人的意見,發(fā)現(xiàn)新的視角.對(duì)于有條件的年輕學(xué)者,可以替自己的上級(jí)(例如老師、上級(jí)醫(yī)師等)草擬審稿意見.做好審稿工作要對(duì)同行要有絕對(duì)的責(zé)任感,通過同行評(píng)閱認(rèn)定高水準(zhǔn)文獻(xiàn),對(duì)科學(xué)進(jìn)步至關(guān)重要.審稿的質(zhì)量會(huì)影響到作者的學(xué)術(shù)態(tài)度和學(xué)術(shù)行為.審稿人面臨的挑戰(zhàn)是,要發(fā)現(xiàn)那些作者本人沒有發(fā)現(xiàn)的東西.這需要對(duì)文獻(xiàn)有全面掌握,既熟悉進(jìn)展,又熟悉經(jīng)典.當(dāng)然,審稿人也會(huì)碰到自己不熟悉的知識(shí)點(diǎn),這時(shí)可以向他人請(qǐng)教、學(xué)習(xí),或者謝絕審稿,請(qǐng)編輯另找他人.做好審稿工作需要相當(dāng)大的智力投入,又不能很快得到同行的認(rèn)可.令作者滿意的是文章被接受,而不是審稿質(zhì)量.但是,一份中肯的、深入的、表達(dá)清楚的評(píng)審意見,能夠增加作者的

7、知識(shí),提升作者從事和報(bào)道科學(xué)研究的水平.審稿時(shí)應(yīng)該對(duì)工作充滿耐心、客觀公正地閱讀,對(duì)新觀點(diǎn)新方法持開放態(tài)度,又不能放水.要提出明確的建議,并有正當(dāng)理由,觀點(diǎn)表達(dá)清楚,讓人看得懂；.在提出全面的、明確的觀點(diǎn)之前,需要反復(fù)斟酌.不同稿件需要的時(shí)間可能不同,有的3個(gè)小時(shí)也不一定夠.1 .接受審稿邀請(qǐng)對(duì)于自己感興趣的題目,研究工作在自己的專業(yè)技能之內(nèi),而且又能拿出時(shí)問認(rèn)真審閱時(shí),可考慮接受邀請(qǐng).對(duì)于自己不熟悉的專業(yè)領(lǐng)域,應(yīng)果斷拒絕.只要你說明拒絕的理由,編輯不會(huì)認(rèn)為你對(duì)審稿不感興趣.2 .閱讀和評(píng)價(jià)先花點(diǎn)時(shí)間看看摘要,初步了解在實(shí)驗(yàn)設(shè)計(jì)、方法、結(jié)果和結(jié)論中,你需要看的重點(diǎn)是什么,特別要看出作者認(rèn)為其工

8、作的重點(diǎn)是什么.提出一個(gè)寬泛的問題,帶著問題去看全文：例如,這是一篇關(guān)于方法學(xué)的論文、是病例總結(jié)還是病例報(bào)道與以往的論文相比,本文的新意是什么然后再仔細(xì)閱讀全文,要看懂；遇到看不懂的地方,要分析原因,是科學(xué)問題令人困惑,還是作者沒有講清楚.不合邏輯或有悖于常識(shí)的科學(xué)問題包括：立相矛盾、結(jié)論無根據(jù)、因果關(guān)系歸因不當(dāng)、不恰當(dāng)推論、循環(huán)推理、糾纏于瑣碎問題等.至于寫作問題,有的是不會(huì)寫或?qū)懖缓?對(duì)此應(yīng)明確提出讓作者修改,例如冗余、跑題、術(shù)語(yǔ)不解釋、用詞不準(zhǔn)確、專業(yè)術(shù)語(yǔ)不標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、縮略語(yǔ)不標(biāo)準(zhǔn).行文要求條理清楚,讓讀者跟著自己的思路走.更重要的是要看實(shí)驗(yàn)設(shè)計(jì)是否交待清楚,研究的邏輯性結(jié)構(gòu)包括目的、假說、假

9、說的可驗(yàn)性預(yù)測(cè)、結(jié)論等是否完善.重要問題不應(yīng)不予以交代,例如方法學(xué)上的局限性,本研究結(jié)果與其他研究結(jié)果的不一致性或一致性等,都需在討論局部予以說明.論文中還會(huì)經(jīng)常碰到一些低級(jí)的過失誤差,例如百分比加起來不是100,數(shù)字前后不一致等,這些往往很容易逃過審稿人的眼睛！讀完第一遍后,不要急于下結(jié)論.繼續(xù)閱讀第二遍,再對(duì)稿件做出評(píng)價(jià).首先評(píng)價(jià)稿件的科學(xué)性,看其科學(xué)性是否正確,特別是推論論證的質(zhì)量、科理和知識(shí)的運(yùn)用.是應(yīng)用性研究還是根底性研究,要考慮對(duì)本刊讀者是否適宜.其次要評(píng)價(jià)稿件的寫作情況,表達(dá)是否清楚、準(zhǔn)確、完整；審稿人看起來都費(fèi)力,何況其他讀者當(dāng)然不同作者的寫作風(fēng)格可有不同,也不必千篇一律.看完

10、后要嘗試提出建議了.給編輯的建議要反映出：1對(duì)稿件最終處理意見的初步看法,即接受還是退稿；2在做出上述決定之前,你認(rèn)為需要采取的舉措有哪些,例如,一篇論文探討的問題是令人關(guān)注的課題,想法也令人很感興趣,但其科學(xué)性不夠強(qiáng),那么你就要提出如何改良其科學(xué)性的建議.你可以提出正反兩方面的看法,供編輯決定是否錄用時(shí)參考.決定是否接受還要考慮到期刊的發(fā)表率.在很多情況下,審稿人的建議是待定,等待作者對(duì)提出的問題給予答復(fù).對(duì)于可能存在嚴(yán)重缺點(diǎn)的稿件,要特別注意給作者答復(fù)的時(shí)機(jī)；有時(shí)他們會(huì)很快將問題解決,有時(shí)問題并不一定能解決.3.撰寫審稿意見給編者的話致編輯包才S3個(gè)局部,文字要精煉,一般不超過三百字：1概

11、要,用三四句話說明研究的主題、根本方法、主要發(fā)現(xiàn),解讀釋義作者的主要結(jié)論.這對(duì)于梳理審稿人的思路很重要,同時(shí)也讓編輯能夠更好地了解以下2局部提出的意見.2主要評(píng)價(jià)和問題.3建議,例如：本文提出了什么新的觀點(diǎn)、有何新的發(fā)現(xiàn)、值得進(jìn)一步修改,等等給作者的意見致作者要更加具體,字?jǐn)?shù)更多一些.根本原那么是,審稿人發(fā)現(xiàn)的問題,必須對(duì)作者說清楚；不要給予表?yè)P(yáng),由于稿件能被接受,作者就夠快樂的了；防止指責(zé),每一篇投稿都是同行長(zhǎng)期工作的成果,這完全沒有必要.給作者的意見同樣包括3個(gè)局部.1概要同致編輯,作者可以得悉審稿人從其論文中看到了什么,有些可能是作者自己都想不到的,這有助于作者突出重點(diǎn),如何準(zhǔn)備回復(fù)或修

12、改.2主要評(píng)價(jià)和問題：逐條書寫,要解釋清楚,要有依據(jù)；不要只給予記性的陳述,例如不要籠統(tǒng)地說對(duì)照組不恰當(dāng),要具體指出問題和理由.對(duì)于寫作上的問題,審稿人有時(shí)也許會(huì)感到生氣：文章沒寫好就投稿,太不禮貌了甚至?xí)f,太不嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)了.遇到寫作問題,審稿人可具體羅列主要的幾條,并提出修改建議.對(duì)于實(shí)在太差的,要明確告訴作者請(qǐng)其上級(jí)導(dǎo)師或有經(jīng)驗(yàn)的同事幫著修改.3次要問題,例如冗余、符號(hào)使用不當(dāng)、錯(cuò)別字等,審稿人一般會(huì)籠統(tǒng)地提及需要修改,但如果能按頁(yè)碼和分行逐一列出,作者肯定會(huì)對(duì)你的嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)態(tài)度和責(zé)任感表示敬佩.審稿意見的一些套話1. Thisisacarefullydonestudyandthefindingsa

13、reofconsiderableinterest.Afewminorrevisionsarelistbelow.2. Thisisawell-writtenpapercontaininginterestingresultswhichmeritpublication.Forthebenefitofthereader,however,anumberofpointsneedclarifyingandcertainstatementsrequirefurtherjustification.Therearegivenbelow.3. Althoughtheseobservationareinterest

14、ing,theyareratherlimitedanddonotadvanceourknowledgeofthesubjectsufficientlytowarrantpublicationinPNAS.Wesuggestthattheauthorstrysubmittingtheirfindingstospecialistjournalsuchas一4. Althoughthispaperisgood,itwouldbeeverbetterifsomeextradatawereadded.5. Thismanuscriptisnotsuitableforpublicationinthejou

15、rnalof-becausethemainobservationitdescribewasreported3yearsagoinareputablejournalof-.6. PleaseasksomeonefamiliarwithEnglishlanguagetohelpyourewritethispaper.Asyouwillsee,Ihavemadesomecorrectionatthebeginningofthepaperwheresomesyntaxisnotsatisfactory.7. Wefeelthatthispotentiallyinterestingstudyhasbee

16、nmarredbyaninabilitytocommunicatethefindingcorrectlyinEnglishandshouldliketosuggestthattheauthorsseektheadviceofsomeonewithagoodknowledgeofEnglish,preferablenativespeaker.8. Thewordingandstyleofsomesection,particularlythoseconcerningHPLC,needcarefulediting.Attentionshouldbepaidtothewordingofthosepar

17、tsoftheDiscussionofandSummarywhichhavebeenunderlined.9. PreliminaryexperimentsonlyhavebeendoneandwithexceptionofthatsummarizedinTable2,nonehasbeenrepeated.Thisisclearlyunsatisfactory,particularlywhenthereissomuchvariationbetweenassays.10. Theconditionofincubationispoorlydefined.Whatisthetemperature?

18、Wereantibodyused?以下是關(guān)于英文投稿過程中編輯給出的意見.12點(diǎn)無輕重主次之分.每一點(diǎn)內(nèi)容由總結(jié)性標(biāo)題和代表性審稿人意見構(gòu)成.1、目標(biāo)和結(jié)果不清楚.ItisnotedthatyourmanuscriptneedscarefuleditingbysomeonewithexpertiseintechnicalEnglisheditingpayingparticularattentiontoEnglishgrammar,spelling,andsentencestructuresothatthegoalsandresultsofthestudyarecleartothereader.

19、2、未解釋研究方法或解釋不充分.Ingeneral,thereisalackofexplanationofreplicatesandstatisticalmethodsusedinthestudy.Furthermore,anexplanationofwhytheauthorsdidthesevariousexperimentsshouldbeprovided.3、對(duì)于研究設(shè)計(jì)的rational:Also,therearefewexplanationsoftherationaleforthestudydesign.4、夸張地陳述結(jié)論/夸大成果/不嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)：Theconclusionsareover

20、stated.Forexample,thestudydidnotshowifthesideeffectsfrominitialcopperburstcanbeavoidwiththepolymerformulation.5、對(duì)hypothesis的清楚界定：Ahypothesisneedstobepresentsd6、對(duì)某個(gè)概念或工具使用的rationale/定義概念：Whatwastherationaleforthefilm/SBFvolumeratio?7、對(duì)研究問題的定義：Trytosettheproblemdiscussedinthispaperinmoreclear,writeone

21、sectiontodefinetheproblem8、如何凸現(xiàn)原創(chuàng)性以及如何充分地寫literaturereview:Thetopicisnovelbuttheapplicationproposedisnotsonovel.9、對(duì)claim,如A>B的證實(shí),verification:Thereisnoexperimentalcomparisonofthealgorithmwithpreviouslyknownwork,soitisimpossibletojudgewhetherthealgorithmisanimprovementonpreviouswork.10、嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)度問題：MNQis

22、easierthantheprimitivePNQS,howtoprovethat.11、格式重視程度：Inaddition,thelistofreferencesisnotinourstyle.Itisclosebutnotcompletelycorrect.Ihaveattachedapdffilewith"InstructionsforAuthors"whichshowsexamples.Beforesubmittingarevisionbesurethatyourmaterialisproperlypreparedandformatted.Ifyouareunsur

23、e,pleaseconsulttheformattingnstructionstoauthorsthataregivenunderthe"InstructionsandForms"buttoninheupperright-handcornerofthescreen.12、語(yǔ)言問題出現(xiàn)最多的問題：有關(guān)語(yǔ)言的審稿人意見：ItisnotedthatyourmanuscriptneedscarefuleditingbysomeonewithexpertiseintechnicalEnglisheditingpayingparticularattentiontoEnglishgram

24、mar,spelling,andsentencestructuresothatthegoalsandresultsofthestudyarecleartothereader.Theauthorsmusthavetheirworkreviewedbyapropertranslation/reviewingservicebeforesubmission;onlythencanaproperreviewbeperformed.Mostsentencescontaingrammaticaland/orspellingmistakesorarenotcompletesentences.Aspresent

25、ed,thewritingisnotacceptableforthejournal.Thereareproblemswithsentencestructure,verbtense,andclauseconstruction.TheEnglishofyourmanuscriptmustbeimprovedbeforeresubmission.Westronglysuggestthatyouobtainassistancefromacolleaguewhoiswell-versedinEnglishorwhosenativelanguageisEnglish.Pleasehavesomeoneco

26、mpetentintheEnglishlanguageandthesubjectmatterofyourpapergooverthepaperandcorrectit?thequalityofEnglishneedsimproving.國(guó)人一篇文章投Mater.類知名國(guó)際雜志,被塞爾維亞一審稿人打25分！個(gè)人認(rèn)為文章還是有一些創(chuàng)新的,所以作為審稿人我就給了66分,這個(gè)分正常應(yīng)該足以發(fā)表,提了一些修改意見,望作者修改后發(fā)表！登錄到編輯部網(wǎng)頁(yè)一看,一個(gè)文章竟然有六個(gè)審稿人,詳細(xì)看了下打的分?jǐn)?shù),60分大修,60分小修,66分我,25分拒,好家伙,竟然打25分,有魄力,拒但沒有打分另一國(guó)人審,最后一個(gè)

27、沒有回來！兩個(gè)拒的是需要我們反思和學(xué)習(xí)的！括號(hào)斜體內(nèi)容為我注解Reviewer4ReviewerRecommendationTerm:RejectOverallReviewerManuscriptRating:25CommentstoEditor:Reviewersarerequiredtoentertheirname,affiliationande-mailaddressbelow.Pleasenotethisisforadministrativepurposesandwillnotbeseenbytheauthor.TitleProf./Dr./Mr./Mrs.:Prof.Name:XXX

28、Affiliation:XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxManuscriptentitled"SynthesisXXX.“ithasbeensynthesizedwithanumberofdifferentmethodsandinavarietyofforms.Thismanuscriptdoesnotbringanynewknowledgeordataonmaterialspropertyandthereforeonlycontributionmaybeinnovelpreparationmethod,stillthispointisnotelaborated

29、properlyseeRemark1.Presentationandwritingisratherpoor;thereareseveralstatementsnotsupportedwithdataforsomeseeRemarks2andevensomeflawsseeRemark3.ForthesereasonsIsuggesttorejectpaperinthepresentform.1. ThepaperdescribesanewmethodforpreparationofXXXX,but:-thenewmethodhastobecomparedwithothermethodsforp

30、reparationofXXXXpowdersINTRODUCTION-literaturedata,RESULTSANDDISCUSSION-discussion,通常的寫作格式,審稿人實(shí)際上很在意的-ithastobedescribedwhythismethodisbetterordifferentfromothermethods,INTRODUCTION-literaturedata,RESULTSANDDISCUSSION-discussion,-ithastobeaddedinthemanuscriptwhatkindofXXXXXXbyothermethodscomparedtot

31、hisnoveloneINTRODUCTION-literaturedata,RESULTSANDDISCUSSION-discussion,-ithastobeoutlinedwhatisthebenefitofthismethodABSTRACT,RESULTSANDDISCUSSION,CONCLUSIONS.很多人不會(huì)寫這個(gè)地方,大家多學(xué)習(xí)啊2. WhendiscussingXRDdataXXXauthors-statethatXXXXX-statethatXXXX-Thisusuallyhappenswithincreasingsinteringtime,butarethereany

32、datatopresent,density,particlesize?很多人用XRD,結(jié)果圖放上去就什么都不管了,這是不應(yīng)該的3. Whendiscussingluminescencemeasurementsauthorswrite"XXXXXIfthereissecondharmonicinexcitationbeamitwillstaytherenomatterwhattypeofmaterialoneinvestigates!研究了什么?4. 英語(yǔ)寫作要提升這條很多人的軟肋,大家努力啊Reviewer5ReviewerRecommendationTerm:RejectOvera

33、llReviewerManuscriptRating:N/ACommentstoEditor:TitleProf./Dr./Mr./Mrs.rof.Name:國(guó)人Affiliation:XXXXXXXXxxxxXXXXXXXXXXXXXxxxxDeareditor:Thankyouforinvitingmetoevaluatethearticletitled"XXXXInthispaper,theauthorsinvestigatedtheinfluencesofsinteringconditiononthecrystalstructureandXXXXXX,However,itis

34、difficultforustounderstandthemanuscriptbecauseofpoorEnglishbeingused.Thetextisnotwellarrangedandthelogicisnotclear.ExceptEnglishwriting,therearemanymistakesinthemanuscriptandtheexperimentalresultsdon'tshowgoodandnewresults.SoIrecommendtoyouthatthismanuscriptcannotbeaccepted.Thefollowingaretheque

35、stionsandsomemistakesinthismanuscripts看看總、體評(píng)價(jià),不達(dá)標(biāo),很多人被這樣郁悶了,當(dāng)然審稿人也有他的道理1. TheXXXXXXX.However,thiskindmaterialhadbeeninvestigatedsince1997asmentionedintheauthor'smanuscript,andsimilarworkshadbeenpublishedinsimilarjournals.Whatarethenovelfindingsinthepresentwork?Thesynthesismethodandluminescencepropertiesreportedinthismanuscriptdidn'tsupplyenoughevidencetosupp