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
