点开我才告诉你的事儿:千万别划走,文末有惊喜!
当你提交了一篇十分满意的论文,兴致勃勃的吃着火锅唱着歌。你一定不会想到,你的得意之作正经历着层层考验,努力从‘百万大军’中脱颖而出。
研究表明,全球期刊的年投稿量约为3百万篇[i]。初选阶段被期刊编辑拒绝的有6%-60%[ii]。论文在通过初步筛选后,将被送去进行同行评审,其中仅1.2%[iii]的论文可以不作修改直接被期刊接受。
这意味着,每一篇能发表的论文都要经过近乎严苛的层层筛选,且几乎所有论文作者都要直面来自同行评审的意见。
那么同行评审都从哪些角度评判文章是否可以发表呢?
科学编辑理事会(Council of Science Editors’)在白皮书中指出,同行评审不仅需要给出公正的评价[iv],还需要:
评估论文语言的清晰与简洁性,以及研究本身的科学准确度、构成、新颖性和相关性。 及时以书面形式反馈论文的优点和整体科学价值。 提醒期刊编辑论文潜在的伦理问题,如缺少知情同意或一稿多投。 给出客观、建设性、有帮助的论文评价,不带任何个人色彩的评论或批评。 确保整个评审流程的保密性。
邮件:fabiao@editage.cn
电话:400-005-6055
想了解更多信息请码怪网搜索:意得辑
[i]KakoliMajumder - Tips for first time peer reviewers: Reviewing a scientificmanuscript responsibly, Editage Insights, 2015. Retrieved fromhttps://www.editage.com/insights/tips-for-first-time-peer-reviewers-reviewing-a-scientific-manuscript-responsibly?loginform=loggedin-normal
[i]Houseof Commons Science and Technology Committee (2011). Peer review in scientificpublications Vol 1. House of Commons: London, UK.
[ii]Schultz DM (2010). Rejection rates forjournals publishing in the atmospheric sciences. Bulletin of the AmericanMeteorological Society, 91(2): 231-243. doi: 10.1175/2009BAMS2908.1.]
[iii]J.Huisman, J. Smits - Duration and quality of the peer review process: theauthor’s perspective, Springer, 2021. Retrieved fromhttps://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-017-2310-5
Kakoli Majumder - Tips for first time peer reviewers: Reviewing a scientific manuscript responsibly, Editage Insights, 2015. Retrieved from https://www.editage.com/insights/tips-for-first-time-peer-reviewers-reviewing-a-scientific-manuscript-responsibly?loginform=loggedin-normal
[iv]Kakoli Majumder - Tips for first time peer reviewers: Reviewing a scientific manuscript responsibly, Editage Insights, 2015. Retrieved from https://www.editage.com/insights/tips-for-first-time-peer-reviewers-reviewing-a-scientific-manuscript-responsibly?loginform=loggedin-normal