期刊论文检测-分享两篇SCI论文被接收心得!

期刊论文检测-分享两篇SCI论文被接收心得!

作为研究生,不可否认的是, SCI论文在大家心目中的地位,三年硕士毕业,或三年博士毕业,我们总是在为之奋斗,痛苦,快乐.而 submit、 under review、 reject、 minor revision等词,却时时刻刻牵动着我们脆弱和不自信的心.当投出稿件后,想必你们也会像我一样,不断地更新邮件,最让人恐惧的莫过于“I regret to have to inform you that.”

想想自己的点点滴滴,以及最近取得的小成就,我觉得有必要也有义务和朋友们分享。

第三年,具体是在2008年初,我的两篇 SCI论文先后被接收,下面我要回忆一下收到两篇 SCI论文的过程。

第1条:

期刊:塔兰塔(2.8分)

Received at Editorial Office: 18-SEP-2007

Article revised: 15-JAN-2008

Article accepted for publication: 18-JAN-2008

主修:生物分析化学

谈到这篇文章,却使我苦恼了一整年,经历了许多,做了许多艰苦的实验,资料相对丰富,因为这是我第一篇文章,写作方面也是摸石头过河,逐句地模仿.为了写这篇文章,我认真研读了该领域的约100篇文献,对别人写的好句,相似的句子都作了标记,在写作过程中想起要表达的意思时,立即翻阅,这样写下去,每天写一小段,有时每天只写几个小句,有时每天只写几个小句,大约一个月后,我发现其中有 abstract, intrduction, experiment, results and discussion,初稿就完成了。

当第一份草稿完成后,大约花了几周时间,然后再做其他的实验,等一周后再来研读,发现文章错误百出,句子连贯,逻辑性差,整篇文章又是仔细研读别人的论文,学习再学习,每天读一晚,回头看自己的文章,再改一遍,又是近几个月,一篇有模有样的草稿出现了,这时我迫不及待地想把它投出去,于是又写了两、三天,又写了一夜,大概也是因为这份草稿,在 Elsevier的投稿系统上花了一整晚的时间,然后把草稿投到了一个领域的分析杂志上,草稿投到了编辑那里,编辑以为我可以修改一下,那就是拒绝了。

Dear ***,

> On behalf of the editor handling your manuscript, I am writing to you in reference to your manuscript entitled:************

I regret to have to inform you that your manuscript is not suitable for publication in ***. This decision has been reached in light of the comments made by the referees. The detailed remarks are appended below.

Reviewers#39; comments:

> Reviewer 1: “*************” seemed to contain sufficient material for publication purpose. However, unfortunately, the authors did not address sufficiently what are the main advantages of this particular detection technique over previously reported ones.

**********

Overall, the English language proved to be insufficient for publication purpose and needs to be revised. Specific care should be taken with regards to prepositions since it can alter the meaning of a statement

Editor:

> Unfortunately, the reviewer has recommended against publication of this work in ***. In examining the reviewer#39;s specific comments, I note that some of the comments mirror those that I made when the manuscript was initially submitted. In particular, the reviewer indicates that the authors have still not made a convincing case for the advantages of the proposed method over earlier techniques. Given these considerations, I must regrettably recommend rejection of this manuscript.

正是因为没有用心写出文章的长处来,所以被杀了,感到很痛心,教训很深刻!

接着,我又选了一本杂志,我觉得它应该很简单,因为我在那本杂志里看到过类似的文章,而且我也觉得它的内容不如我的好.但是这两本杂志属于不同的出版集团,参考文献的格式也完全不同,而且痛苦地花了一个晚上改变了文献的格式,这份工作就像是做针线活一样,睁着眼睛看,你不能急,一急就闷闷不乐.

就是这样,又是一翻上传的痛苦经历,可是,不到两天,不幸又来了,居然以为我的稿件不适合这本杂志,说白了,就是不想要。

Dear Dr***,

I am writing to you on behalf of Editor ****.

We regret to inform you that **** is unable to accept your manuscript *******, Manuscript No. ABC-00938-2007 for publication in *****.

In view of the limited number of pages available to us each year to cover the entire field of analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, its instrumental advances and its wide range of applications, we can only publish a selection of the papers submitted to our journal.

We are sorry not to be able to send you better news.

此时,什么情绪都有,有时想,自己的工作还不够上档次吗?是否真的文章写得很差,因为还没有收到 SCI论文,所以这个时候的自信真的很差,后来干脆把文章放到一边。

心绪平复下来后再想,花了那么多心神做的事,是不可能放弃的,而且当初在选这个题目时就认为这本书还是有一定意义和意义的。

所以,我根据先前审稿人的意思,增加了一些实验,在写作上也丰富了一些.一个多月后,我开始了新的尝试。

这次,显然付出的努力有所回报。

Dear professor ***,

> We have received expert review of your manuscript. You will see that revision of your manuscript is advised, and suggestions are offered for improving the manuscript and it#39;s impact. If you are prepared to undertake the work required, I would be pleased to consider the paper for publication in Talanta.

> For your guidance, reviewers#39; comments are appended below.

Reviewers#39; comments:

< Overall, this is a paper that deserves to be published, but requires revision.(这句话足够了,当时的情绪是难以形容的)

像下面这种观点,也很中肯,感谢审稿人,感谢编辑,感谢 CCTV!

General comments:

> The English used in this paper requires major revision. I do not underestimate the challenge of writing a scientific paper in a language that is not the native tongue. However, the science is currently being complicated by the grammar of the paper. In particular, single/plural conflicts and changes of (and inappropriate use of) tenses (see especially section 2.5 where the middle third of the text switches to the present tense). Improving the paper in this way would ensure that the reader can focus upon the science

1. The discussions throughout the manuscript is superficial, thus thorough and comprehensive discussions are required in the section of “Results and Discussion”.

> 2. Conclusion should not be a duplication of the Abstract.

当然,也提过不少别的意见,这次我可是对待得很认真,其中有一条审稿意见我不太明白,为此我发了一篇贴在某专业论文上与别人讨论了一个多星期。

修正几个月,上传,第三天,刷新邮件,收到消息如下:

Dear professor ***, 

> I am pleased to confirm that your paper “******” has been accepted for publication in Talanta.

> With kind regards, 

下面来看我的第二篇文章

Journal title: Electrochemistry Communications (3.48分)

Received at Editorial Office: 23-DEC-2007

Article revised: 29-JAN-2008

Article accepted for publication: 30-JAN-2008

事实上,在第一篇文章的反复试验中,第二篇文章的试验已经开始并开始写作了,有了第一篇的经验,第二篇显然写得轻松多了,考虑到即将迎来寒假,所以我正在考虑将稿件投给一个审稿周期长的杂志,这样在假期里就不必为稿件操心了,或者投个快一点的杂志,干脆在假期之前完成,最后经过权衡,我选择了后者。

2007年12月18日晚,上载稿件,19日,收到回信,还以为是拒绝,吓坏了,原来是文章要缩短的。

> Electrochemistry Communications

> Dear professor ***,

> This paper is too long for Electrochemistry Communications which aims to publish short, urgent communications (see Guide for Authors). Please either submit it elsewhere as a full paper or shorten it to Communication Length and resubmit.

> For Communication Length please observe the following formula:

> Total number of words + 200 x (No of figures + No of tables) < 3000.

> Your paper currently contains 2929 words and 4 figures. According to the formula above, this is the equivalent of 3729 words, which is too long for this journal.

> Yours sincerely,

> R. Compton

> Editor in Chief

> Electrochemistry Communications

>

> Electrochemistry Communications

> Physical and Theoretical Chemistry Laboratory

> South Parks Road

> Oxford

<OX13 QZ

> UK 

根据要求,仔仔细细地删节,再顺道修改修改,花了一个星期,在西方圣诞节的前一天,我就把稿件发了出去,当时西方正在放假,可想而知,稿件放在里面一点动静都没有,大概到了元月8日,我也该放假回来了吧,可怎么还没有给我的稿件分配一个稿件号呢?由于这本杂志的速度一直都很快,从收到来稿到收到,一般要一个月。

所以我给编辑写了一封信:

Dear professor R. Compton

We have shorten our manuscript entitled “*********” to communication length and resubmitted it to Electrochemistry Communications on 23 December 2007, but have not, as yet, receive the assigned manuscript number. We fear that the manuscript may have been lost and should be grateful if you would let us know whether or not you have received it. If not, we will send our manuscript again. Thank you in advance for your help.

Best regards,

次日,回复了,并立即指定了来稿号码,果然上班了,或许是假期回来,心力交瘁吧.做编辑也不容易。

这么多月的某一天早上,已经放假了,可是大雪封路,无法回家,干脆睡在床上,师姐的电话把我叫醒,说让我查一下邮件,文章要修改,10天内完成。

开了电脑,一封喜讯摆在我面前。

> Electrochemistry Communications

> Dear professor ***,

> We will be pleased to accept your manuscript after revision in the light of the enclosed referee#39;s comments provided they can be attended to within 10 days.

> Please submit a letter fully detailing your response to each point raised by the referee along with your revised manuscript.

> Yours sincerely,

> R. Compton

> Editor in Chief

> Electrochemistry Communications

> Reviewers#39; comments:

> Reviewer #1:

> The authors of this manuscript reported a new application of electrochemiluminescence (ECL) method in assaying telomerase activity. In this work, the magnetic beads-based TRAP-ECL assay was found to be a rapid and very sensitive (c.a. 100 fold increase in sensitivity) method to detect telomerase activity in tumor cells, as compared with the conventional TRAP method. This is an important work for the developed novel TRAP-ECL assay may become a first line assay for clinical diagnosis and prognosis of cancer. Additionally, the paper was organized and presented well, and literatures were cited adequately. I recommend publication after minor revisions.

> Additional Comments:

> 1. A previous important work by Miao and Bard (Anal. Chem. 2004, 76, 5379-5386) on magnetic beads-based ECL for DNA detection should be cited.

> 2. The words “?about 100 fold lower than that ?” (page 6, line2) should be changed to “?about 100 fold higher than that ?”.

编辑很赞同我的作品,小的修改,哪有10天,几个小时就能完成啊.修改得这么快,第二天就收到了录用通知.心里很高兴。

小摘要:

(1)英文写作:两篇文章都是由我自己动手写的,期间除了第一篇文章找一位老师改了几个句子,才得以发表,说明最后英文写作还是达标了.我的心得那就是模仿,没错,看别人怎么写,再套用,老实说,我们自己写的句子有几句能信?谈到模仿,那还得读一大堆文献,当你写不下去的时候,你得找出我在哪里见过类似的句子.我之前和之后看过的文献大约有200篇左右。

二选一:从我个人的经验来看,显然不能以自己的主观想法为信条,有时你觉得不错,适合你的杂志显然不适合你,当然,那不一定是你的文章不适合某一家杂志,更可靠的理由是你的文章不适合某一位审稿人的胃口。

三要严肃对待审稿人的意见:尽可能详细地回答审稿人的问题,那样怕是你自己都觉得写得有点罗嗦没有关系.审稿人是有感情的嘛。

一场比赛,一场比赛

发表评论

邮箱地址不会被公开。 必填项已用*标注