首页

> 期刊发表知识库

首页 期刊发表知识库 问题

硕士研究生收到审稿邀请

发布时间:

硕士研究生收到审稿邀请

Sci区杂志审稿人选拔的过程还是非常严格的,此次能够让研究生担任这也是经过了重重考核的,非常合乎情理。

可以。在初步审查中编辑会确认论文是否符合期刊范畴、遵守期刊投稿各项要求,一旦检查没有问题,编辑便会送交同行评审,一般都会邀请2到3位审稿人进行审稿。

我认为是很正常的,说明是很优秀。不要觉得你自己做不到,别人也做不到。

研究生收到审稿邀请

审稿人一个对于作者来说痛并快乐的存在,审稿人对文章接收与否的建议,往往起到重要的作用,首先我们要明确的是,做审稿人并不能赚钱,审稿人是义务的是不计报酬的,因此审稿人这一角色是崇高的,值得尊敬的。当然凡事都有两面性,做审稿人也有以下的好处:1、 得到编辑的尊敬以及相关研究领域的肯定;2、 有机会被邀请加入学会或编委会;3、 能够最早看到相关领域的最新进展;4、 提高自己稿件的撰写能力。当有一天打开邮箱,发现某杂志社编辑邀请你做某篇文章的审稿人,你可以内心是拒绝的,不过对于自己感兴趣的题目,并且研究工作在自己的专业技能之内,还有时间审稿,那不妨接受这一邀请,填补曾经被别人审的缺憾,玩笑归玩笑,想做一名优秀的审稿人以下的素质你达到了吗?首先要具备责任感和使命感。也许你审的文章对于科技进步有着相当重量,不要因为过多的主观因素把好文章审烂了,当然也不要轻易放过垃圾文章,也要对这类文章敢于说不。其次是要具备科学技能。审稿人面临的挑战是巨大的,需要两项科学技能,一是对文献有全面掌握,即熟悉进展,又熟悉经典;二是掌握相关的科学知识,能够将科学理论和发现应用到新的研究中。如果遇到自己熟悉的知识要及时请教他人或谢绝审稿。第三要有耐心和公正客观的精神。一份严谨细致的评审意见,不仅能够提高稿件的科学性和易读性,也能够增加作者的知识,提高作者从事和报道科学研究的能力。最重要的是无论作者的文章被接受或拒绝都让作者心服口服。最后,要能拿出充足时间。这也是接受审稿的前提,也是对编辑和作者负责,一篇文章通常来说,需要读三遍,一遍浏览,二遍深入文章;三遍就是确确实实的考虑此文章应该如何修改。审稿没有那么容易,每一稿都有它的脾气,想做一名合格的审稿人,还需先做到以上几点哦。 参考:查尔斯沃思论文润色小贴士-Services/2016-09-05-08-07-html

文章刚投就收到审稿邀请并不意味着没戏了。人家需要大量引用,但是直接放在审稿意见里面怕编辑觉得不爽,给你私下说一下,这样你俩都好,他增加了引用,估计是申请绿卡用,你文章基本不会被拒,大家心照不宣,何乐而不为呢?而且给你开辟了一跳路子,以后投这个杂志就找他当审稿人,继续引他文章,还是容易中。

学生收到IEEE审稿邀请

有必要。

论文的审稿制度、过程是怎样的,大多数人不是很熟悉,只知其然却不知其所以然,期刊网阐释,论文审稿的流程一般是:初审、专家审稿、最终定稿。其中初审是期刊杂志社内部编辑进行的,通过之后才能进入专家审核,然后再由主编进行审核,最终才能发布,所以审稿的严谨可见一斑。期刊杂志社初审是基本过滤,一般无大问题的论文都能通过,审稿主要还是在于专家审稿。是专家的审稿水平。当然,审稿专家的学历、经历不同,对一篇论文的审查结论也会有所不同

收到sci审稿邀请研究方向不同

�皇嵌晕颐钦庑┬〉ノ坏娜司涂嗔耍�蛭�悴蝗鲜端�牵�膊豢赡苁撬�堑难��D阒挥小⒅荒芡ü�岣咦约何恼轮柿坎鸥�谢�帷;褂芯褪锹���省⑿��,但目前因为杂志生存的原因,较之以前速度可能也都快起来了,也甚至还有些只要给钱就收的杂志,类似于西太平洋大学似的,这是卖文凭,人家就是卖文章的,当然我想大部分杂志还是能够“客观、公正”进行稿源选择吧,但愿吧。 那SCI杂志又是如何审稿呢,相反应该更“客观”,至少不会歧视你是来自无名的单位,就受邀于几个杂志作为其审稿人来说,绝大部分都采用同行审稿(peer-review),也即邀请你审稿的文章多半是与被邀请人所作的研究相似,这就不存在一定是所谓的“牛人”来审了。与你的职称完全没有关系,不是说教授就有资格,而初级就没有资格被SCI杂志邀请审稿杂志社一般都会通过你发表文章找到你的email(我想应该是这样的,所以通讯更牛叉啊,否在人家不会邀请到你的) 当然你也可以拒绝,因为毕竟不是所有的文章我们都有能力去审的,至少我还没那水平,也曾拒绝过一篇关于基因分析的(虽然了解一些,但很难把握)如你接受后,则会自动连接到审稿人页面(如下),除了author centre外,同时也有reviewer centre的页而一般如果没有被邀请审稿,通常进入作者系统后,只会有anthor centre接下来就是审稿了,这篇文章是国内某F教授为通讯的一篇关于血管紧张素在皮肤中作用的综述,毕竟人家在国内还是相当的啊,也是顺便学习了一下,可一下载稿件一看,怎么看怎么不像综述,充其量是个mini review,四个段落,1198个字,26篇参考文献。既然杂志社邀请我审稿,也综述的我所做过的研究,却没引用我的文章,有点“失落”,更重要的是更多文献他们也没有引用,而是引用他们自己的“中文”文章,但还是认真的“分析”了此文。给出审稿意见如下:The review by *** et addresses the interesting and novel topic of the renin-angiotensin-system (RAS), which was originally described as a cardiovascular endocrine system, in skin physiology and Only in recent years, the cutaneous RAS has become an area of scientific interest, and the number of related publications is increasing from year to Therefore, it is indeed time for an article which reviews the existing literature up to However, this review has a number of 中国人语言每次都被审稿人发飙,我的也是,至少部分文章投出去审稿人也是要让我改进,唔,每次让我找个母语的人帮修改,我滴个汗,俺们中国人哪有以说英语母语的,索性每次都“忽悠”过去了,当然也许只是些小杂志的原因吧,语言真的需要提高、再提高。同样该综述,我也提出了我的部分语言意见 - Language editing is - The number of publications dealing with the RAS in skin is still not very Therefore, there is no need to focus this review article on the AT2-receptor (for which data are even more limited) Instead, this review should consider all published data about the cutaneous RAS - Many publications are For example: �6�1Min et , Endocrinology 2004 �6�1Nakai et , J Dermatol Sci 2008 �6�1Rompe et , Hypertension 2010 �6�1Steckelings et , (Exp Dermatol 2004) �6�1Yevdokimova et , J Dermatol Sci 2007 �6�1Morihara et , J Am Acad Dermatol 2006 �6�1Yahata et , J Biol Chem 2006 �6�1Takeda et , Am J Pathol 2004 并逐部分给予我的意见:Abstract:- In the case of AT1R-blockade, AT2R unmasking may indeed be important, but blockade of the AT1R thus interrupting AT1R-mediated actions of Ang II, is at least as The respective passage in the abstract is Introduction: - 3, line 13: “disorders of RAS”: A “disorder” of the RAS has so far only been described for scleroderma (not saying whether the deregulated RAS is a primary cause or only a secondary phenomenon) It is indeed likely that the RAS is deregulated in the other mentioned dermatoses as well, but this is pure speculation and should be discussed as - 3, line 19: “existence of RAS in skin”: References 2 and 3 demonstrate only the existence of receptors, but not of the whole RAS in Adequate references would be: Steckelings et , Exp Dermatol or Philips MI et , In: Saavedra J M, Timmermans P M W M, Angiotensin New York: Plenum Press, 1994: 377– - 3, line 20: “It has been documented…”: It is correct that AT2R upregulation has been demonstrated in skin, and it is also correct that Ang II has been shown to accelerate cutaneous wound However, it has never been shown that acceleration of wound healing by Ang II is mediated by the AT2R In fact, this is rather unlikely, since the AT2R acts anti- - Chapter II 1: Physiological receptor expression should be addressed prior to receptor expression in - p4, line 5 from bottom: “Ang II either…” Please add - chapter II 2: The high expression of Ang II receptors during foetal life indeed suggests a role in However, Ang II receptor knockout mice show no severe developmental deficits, in particular not in Furthermore, there are almost no data about what specifically the role of the AT2R in development may This should be - chapter II 3: This chapter is much too For example, the description of deregulated receptor expression in some dermatoses by Takeda and Kondo (Am J Pathol 2001, Br J Dermatol 2001 and 2002) has not been This chapter may further be the place for some speculations (based on data from non-cutaneous tissues) in which dermatoses the RAS may be - page 5, line 5: “Kawaguchi et al …in SSc fibroblasts, suggesting that… “: This is not a logical What is the causal link between AT2R in SSc fibroblasts and excessive ECM production? Furthermore, expression of AT2R has been shown by several authors for normal - page 5, line 12: Steckelings is a woman (“her” colleagues) - page 5, last section: The impact of AT2R expression on immune cells and of AT2R effects on vascularisation and neuroregeneration with regard to wound healing is not sufficiently - 6, 2 lines from bottom: “…restoring normality not only in the CV system but also in many tissues, such as ” Please provide a reference for the statement that the AT2R has been shown to restore normality in 最后提交时杂志社会有一个勾选表,该文被我拒了该文编辑在结合另一个审稿人意见的情况下还是reject此文了,从投稿到最后给出decision约6个星期,应该说是正常速度了。有意思的是中途,编辑发信催审稿了,估计是作者急着想知道结果,可以理解,想想之前的我们也何尝不是啊,每天都不停得刷屏,也写过催稿信,还以为没有用,甚至有时候也不“敢”写,因为害怕是否会有“反”作用,看来某些时候写信催催也还是可以的。总之,审稿也未必是件好差事,不过倒是可以知己知彼,可以站在审稿人的角度去思考我们自己在写文章的时候应该注意什么,别人文章的有哪些优点、缺点,我们都可以好好去总结,同时我们也获得与最新研究领域的接触也为以后研究,能够写作提供更多的思路。

收到sci审稿邀请

我可以帮助您+握2林。呜呜。酒肆。霸气霸

相关百科

热门百科

首页
发表服务