发布时间：
问题一：如何回复SCI投稿审稿人意见 第三个审稿人的意见如下： Reviewer #3: The present paper addresses a hot topic of interest in the area. The first part section the paper presents a brief and concise state of the art of the domain approached. Since this topic has been intensively studied during the last decade and a large number of papers and books have been published, this part might be extended to include the most recent research in this domain, and have to be included in Chapter +References: R.O. Preda, D.N. Vizireanu, Blind Watermarking Capacity Analysis of MPEG2 Coded Video, IEEE TELSIKS 2007, 8th International Conference on Telemunications in Modern Satellite, Cable and Broadcasting Services, 26-28 Sept. 2007, Nis, Serbia and Montenegro, p. 465-468. D.N. VIZIREANU, R.O Preda, BD Milovanovic, A New Digital Watermarking scheme for Image Copyright Protection using Wavelet Packets, IEEE TELSIKS 2005, 7th Intern. Conf. on Telem. in Modern Satellite, Cable and Broadcasting Services, 28-30 September 2005, Nis, Serbia and Montenegro, p. 518-521. Some interesting papers have been published recently in CS&SP and have to be included in Chapter 1 +References. The authors contribution is not clearly underlined. Moreover, the performance design criteria are not addressed in the simulation part. The simulation results presented are sometimes uncler. The abbreviations presented in figures are not clear and should be explained in more detail. The results should be more emphasized and the concl......>> 问题二：sci第二次修改 该怎么写回复信件 List of Responses Dear Editors and Reviewers: Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ ments concerning ourmanuscript entitled “Paper Title” (ID: 文章稿号). Those ments are all valuable and very helpfulfor revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guidingsignificance to our researches. We have studied ments carefully and havemade correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked inred in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to thereviewer’s ments are as flowing: Responds to the reviewer’s ments: Reviewer #1: 1. Response to ment: (……简要列出意见……) Response: ×××××× 2. Response to ment: (……简要列出意见……) Response: ×××××× 。。。。。。 逐条意见回答，切忌一定不能有遗漏 针对不同的问题有下列几个礼貌术语可适当用用： 问题三：如何回复SCI投稿审稿人意见 给范文：Response to ments Dear Editors and Reviewers: Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ ments concerning our manuscript entitled xxxxxxxxxxxxxx. Those ments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied ments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s ments are as following: ments:（列举提问题切忌要遗漏任何项） 1. ......... Please check and revise. 2. .......... Please revise. 3. .......... Response:（表示遗憾谢并且详细说明改进程/或解释审稿疑惑要详细题号要应面问题编号） 1. We are very sorry for our unclear report in...... 2. It is our negligence and we are sorry about this. According to ment, related content have been improved. ....... 3. As the Reviewer's good advice, ....... Special thanks to you for your good ments. 20xx-xx-xx 国外审稿人是义务的，可以根据文章质量和自己的看法自由地提出意见和建议。国外审稿人绝大多数治学严谨，很注重reputation，可以说拿信誉当生 命。当他们接到审稿要求时，如果很忙或不懂你的专业或领域，他们会decline。但只要答应审稿，一般都是尽职尽责的完成审稿任务。因此，当你接到审稿 人的意见时，首先要摆正心态，保持冷静。不要用偏见的心态去断定审稿人有偏见、歧视。做研究的确很辛苦，发表文章也确实很不容易。但审稿人同 样也很辛苦，也很不容易。他们认认真真地阅读你的文章，给你提出中肯的意见，甚至很好的建议。如果还被你措辞强硬的怪罪一阵，换着谁也会生气。要知道，找 理由拒绝一篇文章并不是一件很难的事情。因此，这个时候，你一定要好好的静下心来，好好分析sci论文发表审稿人的意见，找出问题的所在。 1.所有问题必须逐条回答；2.尽量满足意见中需要补充的实验；3.满足不了的也不要回避，说明不能做的合理理由；4。对于你不认同的意见，也要委婉有技巧地回答，做到有理有据有节；5. 审稿人推荐的文献一定要引用，并加以讨论。...>> 问题四：论文审稿意见怎么写 我以前的博士论文，评阅人就是根据我论文里的摘要写的，精炼一下就OK了。评阅书里面应该有自己写的创新点，你可以参照写一下。leonshane(站内联系TA)首先对这篇论文进行简单概括，指出其主要线索：研究目标、方法、意义、创新等，然后指出一两个最大的问题，如果其问题的确是致命的话，那么久建议修改。 你写完你导师会帮你把关的，如果他不看，建议你申请换导师。。。shuoyeb(站内联系TA)一、概况评价项目：论文的创新性成果 论文的学术价值及应用价值 论文反映出作者的基础理论和专门知识水平论文写作论文总体评价 二、综合所有评阅人对论文的学术评语 （选题的意义，论文的创新性成果，学术价值及应用价值，实验结果和计算数据的合理性及可靠性等）……三、论文中存在的问题、不足及意见或建议 1. 评议人认为第*章第*节****中有****的问题*****。 2. ……lbh535(站内联系TA)评审意见应点面结合。面就是总体概况，而点则至少体现评阅人有没有仔细看内容。现在好多论文评审一审就是一大批，特别是社会科学方面的，评阅意见都写些泛泛而谈的东西，感觉评阅人就没太仔细看。qiuqu_200212(站内联系TA)建议答辩，然后简单写些评语即可。k10001(站内联系TA)还有一段八股：论文表明，***在所研究领域掌握了坚实宽广的基础理论和系统深入的专门知识，具备了（很强的）独立从事科学研究工作的能力，论文（具有创新性，）达到了博士论文学术水平。建议组织博士学位论文答辩。nono2009(站内联系TA)评阅表中有提示的，按提示要求的几项内容写评阅意见即可。songjm12(站内联系TA)好好阅读评审书前两页要求部分 写好评语就行了yuffey(站内联系TA)研究问题清晰不，研究目标明确不，方法得当不，结果明显不？ 工作量饱满不，内容充实不？等等 最好的方法是，找个以前的博士论文，抄写抄写。八股文~~ 问题五：sci怎么回复审稿意见 小木虫 问: sci投稿，四个审稿人，两个提了问题，两个改的格式，一个在原文上改，直接发的pdf，估计修改的有一百多处吧，另一个提出第几页第几行改什么等等，编辑要求在修订模式下修改原文，我还需要一一回复修改格式的审稿人么，如何回复他修改的格式呢，他没有提问题，只帮我改了格式。 答: 原则上不用~ 既然在修订模式下进行~ 就一次到位~ 问题六：sci审稿意见回复写在一封信里吗 需要啊~ 而且最好有一个word文档逐条去回复审稿人的意见以及你是如何修改的，并且在修改稿里面用不同的颜色标注出你所修改的部分。 回复审稿意见一定要认真。谦虚这方面，你可以从他提的问题去判断审稿人的水平。如果提的问题明显外行，可以强势一些。不是说每个问题都要修改，但是每个问题都要回应。 问题七：大修审稿意见，重金求教如何回复 投稿Energy，35天后返回修改，给的大修，求教有经验的虫友如何回复审稿意见比较好。另外，为什么附件里只有一个人的审稿人意见？Dear***, The review of this paper is now plete, and I am including the Reviewers' reports (directly at the end of this email and sometimes as attachments). As you can see, one Reviewer remends rejection, and the others remend possible reconsideration after major revisions. If you are able to revise the manuscript thoroughly in response to the Reviewers' ments, I believe that it would be suitable for second review. I should add that, in view of the strong critici *** s, anything but a thorough response and revision would just be an unfortunate waste of time. Once you have revised the paper accordingly, please submit with it a note describing in detail your response to these ments and a separate copy of the revised paper marked up to indicate where the revisions were made. NOTE: Upon submitting your revised manuscript, please upload the source files for your article. For additional details regarding acceptable file formats, please refer to the Guide for Authors at: elsevier/...uthors When submitting your revised paper, we ask that you include the following items: Manuscript and Figure Source Files (mandatory) We cannot acmodate PDF manuscript files for production purposes. We also ask that when submitting your revision you follow the journal fo......>> 问题八：如何回复编辑和审稿人 回复审稿人的格式很简单，先感谢审稿人的宝贵意见，接着说已经按照要求修改过了，然后就是修改的明细，通常是一问一答，先是审稿人的意见，然后是自己的回答。 问题九：工科类文章审稿意见怎么写 英文 工科类文章审稿意见 Review ments on the article of Engineering 工科类文章审稿意见 Review ments on the article of Engineering 问题十：论文接收 英文审稿意见 怎么写 ①正确性：论点的说服力根植于对客观事物的正确反映，而这又取决于作者的立场、观点、态度、方法是否正确，如果论点本身不正确，甚至是荒谬的，再怎么论证也不能说服人。因此，论点正确是论文的最起码的要求。 ②鲜明性：赞成什么、反对什么，要非常鲜明，千万不能模棱两可，含糊不清。 ③新颖性：论点应该尽可能新颖、深刻，能超出他人的见解，不是重复他人的老生常谈，也不是无关痛痒、流于一般的泛泛而谈，应该尽可能独特、新颖。
科研人想要成功发表一篇SCI，往往要经历写作、投稿、等待这一系列漫长的过程，当在收到一篇文章返修意见的时候心里别提有多激动了。 收到返修意见说明文章已经被审稿人初步认可，为了让自己的心血不被浪费，文章能顺利发表，我们要花时间和经历去回复审稿意见，这就要求大家除了具备专业性之外，还要注意回复的语气、格式等细节 本篇文章笔者 手把手教各位科研人如何高情商回复 Reviewers ，很纯的干货，认真读完相信你一定有所收获！ 1. 阅读返修意见 首先要认真阅读全部审稿意见，一般每篇文章会有 2-3 个审稿人的意见，每位审稿人的意见数量可能一两条到十几条不等。每位审稿人的意见一般会逐条列出。在阅读退修意见的过程中，我们要清楚目的，首先是弄懂每一条意见，充分 get 审稿人的要求。 其次要对所有意见有一个归纳整理，分清主次。 最后要注意除文章内容之外的一些要求，如文章修回的 deadline，补充完善作者信息等。 2. 制定回复策略 当认真读完审稿人意见之后，建议大家将所有意见复制粘贴到 word 文档，对所列意见逐条分析。根据笔者经验，所有意见可以根据难易程度分为简单、复杂、困难这三种。 下面笔者将以一些既往文章收到过的退修意见为例来向大家说明： 简单的一般是改正错别词、语法，规范格式，补充缩写词全称，提高图片质量，等等。如图 1： 图1 复杂的一般指我们通过查阅文献之后即可用事实依据解答审稿人的疑问，比如为什么选择某个药物、某个实验对象等，因为审稿人有时不一定是你所研究领域的专家，所以我们用事实说话解开审稿人的疑惑也就成功回答了这类问题。如图 2： 图2 困难的一般是指审稿人对文章涉及到的方法、结果、结论等的质疑，这些就需要各位认真斟酌，谨慎回答，切记要有理有据。如图 3： 图3 3. 编辑回复内容 分析过审稿人意见之后，我们就可以着手回复了，下面几条划重点啦： （1）我们注意要对所有的退修意见逐条进行回复 在每条意见下面写上相应回复内容，一般回复的结构为：感谢审稿人的意见+已修改的内容。可以写感谢审稿人善意的提醒/严谨的态度/专业的意见等等，表达出我们虚心学习的态度。 （2）在回复的正文内容的首和尾要分别有一段前言和一段总结 回复的语气一定要诚恳且礼貌，在内容中除了要说明修改的内容之外，还要体现感谢编辑和审稿人对文章的认可以及辛苦的工作。 （3）在回复内容的最后写上「如果有任何问题请随时联系」类似的话 这样既显示了我们认真的态度，也间接表达了我们期盼回复的心情。 （4）如有引用文献回答审稿人问题的，需在回答内容后面附上所参考文献的 DOI 编号，论点+论据会更能使审稿人信服。 下面图 4 为笔者常用的回复审稿人意见的模板，提供给大家参考。 图4 虽然每个人的稿件情况不同，回复信也都是千差万别，但多多少少还是有一定模板性的，尤其是对于第一次遇到这种情况的研究生朋友们，可以先从模板开始熟悉一下此类回复信的大体内容和形式。 模板1：精简版本 下面这个是我自己以前写的一个模板，拿出来分享给大家。 Dear Editor XX and Reviewers, Thanks very much for taking your time to review this manuscript. I really appreciate all your comments and suggestions! Please find my itemized responses in below and my revisions/corrections in the re-submitted files. （这一段基本上是套话） Thanks again! 下面就开始回复文章的审稿意见了，一般首先是回复期刊编辑的整体意见： SUGGESTIONS FROM EDITOR（注意这一段要把编辑原始的建议粘贴在这里，不能只有回应） Your response to the general comments from the editor 接下来是逐条回应审稿人的建议： COMMENTS TO THE AUTHOR: Reviewer #1: Response to the questions one by one Reviewer #2: Response to the questions one by one 模板2: 完整版本 这个模板是完整版本，保留了很多逐条回答审稿人的常用短语和句式，值得收藏和学习！ Dear Editor, Dear reviewers Thank you for your letter dated February 22. We were pleased to know that our work was rated as potentially acceptable for publication in Journal, subject to adequate revision. We thank the reviewers for the time and effort that they have put into reviewing the previous version of the manuscript. Their suggestions have enabled us to improve our work. Based on the instructions provided in your letter, we uploaded the file of the revised manuscript. Accordingly, we have uploaded a copy of the original manuscript with all the changes highlighted by using the track changes mode in MS Word. Appended to this letter is our point-by-point response to the comments raised by the reviewers. The comments are reproduced and our responses are given directly afterward in a different color (red). We would like also to thank you for allowing us to resubmit a revised copy of the manuscript. We hope that the revised manuscript is accepted for publication in the Journal of Mountain Science. Sincerely, XXXXXXX （同样是套话，这个模板写了这么长。。。虽然我不是很喜欢，但是适合拿来逐句学习，为己所用） Reviewer 1： Comments to the Author 这个审稿人的意见分为两部分： 第一部分是一般性的评论和修改建议（多为比较大的问题）。 Here are the general comments from the reviewer... We thank the reviewer for the very interesting comment. In fact… Regarding the suggestion about the methods, we changed this part… Another issue on the methodological section is that... We are grateful for the suggestion. To be more clear and in accordance with the reviewer concerns, we have added a brief description as follows: “ 接下来是第二部分“小的建议”，也就是需要逐条回复的那种，一般是用词用句的修改。 Minor comments: The title is too long, I suggest shortening. Modified throughout the text according to the comment (Line 20, page 1).Thank you for the title suggested. The precedent version of the title has been replaced, becoming... Line 25, page 1… Modified throughout the text according to the comment (Line 20, page 1). Line 18, page 2… We have modified the sentence according to the previous comment (Line 30, page 2). Line 33, page 3… Thank you for underlining this deficiency. This section was revised and modified according to the information showed in the work suggested by the reviewer (Line 41, page 3). Line 59, page 5… This phrase was modified according to the comment (Line 30, page 5). Lines 9-24, page 6… Thank you for the suggestion. We have added the information required as explained above (Lines 6-28, page 6). Line 11, page 6… This sentence was rephrased according to the comment (Line 8, page 6). Line 35, page 13: “exit section”->”outlet” (please check also throughout the text, e.g. at line 54, page 13) We have modified this expression throughout the text according to the comment. 论文的发表终究还是取决于科研硬实力，以上技巧和经验都只是锦上添花，在论文发表方面助大家一臂之力，让我们的稿件更容易被录用。最后祝每个科研人科研丰收，生活美满！
你知道怎么回复审稿意见么
首先，诚恳的态度是至关重要的，提交文章修改后要附上一个cover letter。里面包含这些内容：（1）感谢编辑安排审稿以及审稿人提出的宝贵意见。（2）作者已经认真按照审稿人的要求对问题一一作答，并对文章进行了仔细的修改，文章的所有修改都着重标出。（3）因为你们的建议，经过修改后的文章变得更好，读者们可以获得更有价值的信息。（4）再次感谢编辑和审稿人的帮助。虽然cover letter的内容也都是客套话，但是编辑跟审稿人看着也会舒心不少。特别是审稿人，需要认真地无偿地审阅文章，难能可贵的是还需要找出不足的地方。即便有时因为研究方向不是很一致，他们有的问题有点业余，又或者提意见时比较不客气，回复审稿意见的时候也一定要尊重他们。第二，另外起草一个单独的response letter。 在这里用问答式一一列出每个审稿人的意见并且一一作答。对于文字的修改要求，直接接受就行了。有的审稿人要求增加参考文献，也许这是审稿人唯一显示他私心的地方——比如要求引用他的文章，不是很离谱的情况下也可以照办，或者打个折嘛，要求引用三篇最后加上一篇嘛。回答问题的时候，最好简洁和就事论事，不要拖泥带水。要注意不要为了回答某个问题而导致更多的疑问，尽量将讨论局限在有限的范围内。第三，有的审稿人与文章的研究方向有差异，或者没有认真读文章，导致对文章的理解有误，从而提出一些莫名其妙的问题。回答这些问题的时候，可以首先引用一下文章的相关句子，然后指出文章的真正意思。接着承认是自己的表达出现问题了，让审稿人曲解了意思，最后指出句子已经重写，表达的意思已经更准确了。这样的回答，既巧妙地回答了该问题，也避免了让审稿人尴尬。第四，如果遇到了非常难回答的问题，比如审稿人质疑文章的创新性有限，价值不大。这些是文章的硬伤，是没有办法修改的。赞同审稿人的意见肯定不好，但是用回避的方式不回答更不好，既不礼貌也侧面赞同了审稿人。这个问题尽管很难回答，但是还是要去争取一下，比如再强调一下文章里面相关的几个句子。要知道每个人的见解不同，虽然一个审稿人觉得意义不大，但是决定权毕竟是在编辑手里，只要编辑在综合多个审稿人意见之后还觉得文章有可取之处，也就没有问题。而response letter是所有审稿人都可以看到的，诚恳的回答会获得其他审稿人的好感。第五，审稿意见里面经常出现的问题是要求补充信息，比如更多的实验结果或者与该文章相关的另外的一些信息。这样的问题需要仔细斟酌一下，如果仅仅是审稿人出于自己的好奇，是可以选择在response letter 里提供而不是直接添加到文章里面。而如果对所有读者都有用，则需要加到文章里面。对于审稿人提出的不合理的建议，可以心平气和地找个客观的理由委婉地拒绝或者提供一些参考资料，不要让审稿人觉得你对他的问题视而不见。英论阁sci论文润色出版支持
保持正确的语调，做出回应。
说明
（1）在回复审稿人意见的时候，除了写明修改内容外，还有一些话是必须要写的。这个其实也可以归纳为礼貌用语，大家一般也都会注意到。但是，有些时候还是容易“放飞自我”。实验室的一位师兄，花了很长的时间搞出来一个很有idea的文章。
（2）在回复审稿意见的时候，前面还是客客气气的回复，一读到关于自己核心idea的时候，立马心态就炸了，言辞什么的就有点过激了，最后当然直接被拒了。其实能作为审稿人，一般都是这个领域的专家或者有一定贡献的人，既然能指出你的问题，就说明还是存在不合理的地方，那就认认真真去修改就好了，千万不要太持才傲物。
（3）里很多人都会轻易犯错，尤其是刚发论文的时候，总觉得自己一定要根据审稿人的每一条意见都做出修改。我以自己的亲身经历发誓，这样做只会使你的论文变得支离破碎，可读性变差且言之无物（因为我自己曾改出过这么一篇不忍直视的论文，连我自己都读不下去）。论文上署的是你的名字，你得对所有内容负责。
（4）不妨想想审稿人的审稿动机和职责，他们才不会去想这些审稿意见对你的论文究竟有没有用。如果你不同意某些意见，或者觉得一些意见并不能提升你论文的价值的话，那就把握好回复的分寸，对这些意见予以一定反驳，并且反驳时尽量使用参考文献，使之有理有据。
【SCI修改稿回答审稿人意见范文模板】 List of Responses 0.1 Dear Editors and Reviewers: 1.1 Thank you for your letter and for the reviewer's comments concering our manuscript “Title”(ID: ). 1.2 Thank you very much for your careful review and constructive suggestions with regard to our manuscript "Title"(ID). 2.1 Thoses comments are very helpful for us to revise and imporve our paper. 2.2 Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the importance guiding significane to our researches. 3.1 We have studied these comments carefully and tried our best to revise and imporve the manuscript. 3.2 made great changes in the manuscript according to the reviewer's comments. 3.3 We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. 4.1 Our main corrections in the manuscript and the responds to the reviewer's comments are as follows and a PDF file "xxx.pdf" ( main corrections are marked in red and blue color ). 4.2 Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. 5.1 The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer's comments are as following: 6.1 Responds to the reviewer's comments: 6.1.1 Response to comment: [... COMMENT ...] 6.1.2 Response: ... 7.1 We are very sorry for our negligence of ... 7.2 We are very sorry for our incorrect writing ... 7.3 It is really true as Reviewer suggested that ... 7.4 we have made correction according to the Reviewer's comments. 7.5 we have re-write this part to the Reviewer's suggestion. 7.6 As Reviewer suggested that ... 7.7 Considering the Reviewer's suggestion, we have ... 7.8 Thank you for pointing this out. 8.1 Line 22-33, the statements of "... ... " were corrected as "... ..." 8.2 Line 333, "... ..." was added/deleted. 8.3 ... was usde here as .. to ... 8.4 In addition, by studying that, we can directly compare our results with previous studies. 8.5 more details in the first paragraph of Section 3.3. 8.6 A and B's research groups have done blablablabla. However, the focus of our work is on blablabla, which is very different from A and B's work, and this is also the major contribution of our work. 8.7 We have added the following discussion on this issue in our revised manuscript, see ... 9.1 Special thanks to you for your good comments. 3.3 we tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. 4.3 these changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. 5.2 And here we did not list the changes but marked in red in revised paper. 9.2 we appreciate Editors/Reviewers' warm work earnestly, and hope the correction will meet with approval. 10.1 once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions. list of actions: LOA1: The revised manuscript is double spaced / marked in red / ... LOA2: a paragraph has been added in page 5 to further explain the algorithm ... LOA3: Explanations of the legned of Figure 3 have been added in page 7. LOA4: Fig. 2 has been enlarged / changed / ... LOA5: All typos have been removed.
科研人想要成功发表一篇SCI，往往要经历写作、投稿、等待这一系列漫长的过程，当在收到一篇文章返修意见的时候心里别提有多激动了。 收到返修意见说明文章已经被审稿人初步认可，为了让自己的心血不被浪费，文章能顺利发表，我们要花时间和经历去回复审稿意见，这就要求大家除了具备专业性之外，还要注意回复的语气、格式等细节 本篇文章笔者 手把手教各位科研人如何高情商回复 Reviewers ，很纯的干货，认真读完相信你一定有所收获！ 1. 阅读返修意见 首先要认真阅读全部审稿意见，一般每篇文章会有 2-3 个审稿人的意见，每位审稿人的意见数量可能一两条到十几条不等。每位审稿人的意见一般会逐条列出。在阅读退修意见的过程中，我们要清楚目的，首先是弄懂每一条意见，充分 get 审稿人的要求。 其次要对所有意见有一个归纳整理，分清主次。 最后要注意除文章内容之外的一些要求，如文章修回的 deadline，补充完善作者信息等。 2. 制定回复策略 当认真读完审稿人意见之后，建议大家将所有意见复制粘贴到 word 文档，对所列意见逐条分析。根据笔者经验，所有意见可以根据难易程度分为简单、复杂、困难这三种。 下面笔者将以一些既往文章收到过的退修意见为例来向大家说明： 简单的一般是改正错别词、语法，规范格式，补充缩写词全称，提高图片质量，等等。如图 1： 图1 复杂的一般指我们通过查阅文献之后即可用事实依据解答审稿人的疑问，比如为什么选择某个药物、某个实验对象等，因为审稿人有时不一定是你所研究领域的专家，所以我们用事实说话解开审稿人的疑惑也就成功回答了这类问题。如图 2： 图2 困难的一般是指审稿人对文章涉及到的方法、结果、结论等的质疑，这些就需要各位认真斟酌，谨慎回答，切记要有理有据。如图 3： 图3 3. 编辑回复内容 分析过审稿人意见之后，我们就可以着手回复了，下面几条划重点啦： （1）我们注意要对所有的退修意见逐条进行回复 在每条意见下面写上相应回复内容，一般回复的结构为：感谢审稿人的意见+已修改的内容。可以写感谢审稿人善意的提醒/严谨的态度/专业的意见等等，表达出我们虚心学习的态度。 （2）在回复的正文内容的首和尾要分别有一段前言和一段总结 回复的语气一定要诚恳且礼貌，在内容中除了要说明修改的内容之外，还要体现感谢编辑和审稿人对文章的认可以及辛苦的工作。 （3）在回复内容的最后写上「如果有任何问题请随时联系」类似的话 这样既显示了我们认真的态度，也间接表达了我们期盼回复的心情。 （4）如有引用文献回答审稿人问题的，需在回答内容后面附上所参考文献的 DOI 编号，论点+论据会更能使审稿人信服。 下面图 4 为笔者常用的回复审稿人意见的模板，提供给大家参考。 图4 虽然每个人的稿件情况不同，回复信也都是千差万别，但多多少少还是有一定模板性的，尤其是对于第一次遇到这种情况的研究生朋友们，可以先从模板开始熟悉一下此类回复信的大体内容和形式。 模板1：精简版本 下面这个是我自己以前写的一个模板，拿出来分享给大家。 Dear Editor XX and Reviewers, Thanks very much for taking your time to review this manuscript. I really appreciate all your comments and suggestions! Please find my itemized responses in below and my revisions/corrections in the re-submitted files. （这一段基本上是套话） Thanks again! 下面就开始回复文章的审稿意见了，一般首先是回复期刊编辑的整体意见： SUGGESTIONS FROM EDITOR（注意这一段要把编辑原始的建议粘贴在这里，不能只有回应） Your response to the general comments from the editor 接下来是逐条回应审稿人的建议： COMMENTS TO THE AUTHOR: Reviewer #1: Response to the questions one by one Reviewer #2: Response to the questions one by one 模板2: 完整版本 这个模板是完整版本，保留了很多逐条回答审稿人的常用短语和句式，值得收藏和学习！ Dear Editor, Dear reviewers Thank you for your letter dated February 22. We were pleased to know that our work was rated as potentially acceptable for publication in Journal, subject to adequate revision. We thank the reviewers for the time and effort that they have put into reviewing the previous version of the manuscript. Their suggestions have enabled us to improve our work. Based on the instructions provided in your letter, we uploaded the file of the revised manuscript. Accordingly, we have uploaded a copy of the original manuscript with all the changes highlighted by using the track changes mode in MS Word. Appended to this letter is our point-by-point response to the comments raised by the reviewers. The comments are reproduced and our responses are given directly afterward in a different color (red). We would like also to thank you for allowing us to resubmit a revised copy of the manuscript. We hope that the revised manuscript is accepted for publication in the Journal of Mountain Science. Sincerely, XXXXXXX （同样是套话，这个模板写了这么长。。。虽然我不是很喜欢，但是适合拿来逐句学习，为己所用） Reviewer 1： Comments to the Author 这个审稿人的意见分为两部分： 第一部分是一般性的评论和修改建议（多为比较大的问题）。 Here are the general comments from the reviewer... We thank the reviewer for the very interesting comment. In fact… Regarding the suggestion about the methods, we changed this part… Another issue on the methodological section is that... We are grateful for the suggestion. To be more clear and in accordance with the reviewer concerns, we have added a brief description as follows: “ 接下来是第二部分“小的建议”，也就是需要逐条回复的那种，一般是用词用句的修改。 Minor comments: The title is too long, I suggest shortening. Modified throughout the text according to the comment (Line 20, page 1).Thank you for the title suggested. The precedent version of the title has been replaced, becoming... Line 25, page 1… Modified throughout the text according to the comment (Line 20, page 1). Line 18, page 2… We have modified the sentence according to the previous comment (Line 30, page 2). Line 33, page 3… Thank you for underlining this deficiency. This section was revised and modified according to the information showed in the work suggested by the reviewer (Line 41, page 3). Line 59, page 5… This phrase was modified according to the comment (Line 30, page 5). Lines 9-24, page 6… Thank you for the suggestion. We have added the information required as explained above (Lines 6-28, page 6). Line 11, page 6… This sentence was rephrased according to the comment (Line 8, page 6). Line 35, page 13: “exit section”->”outlet” (please check also throughout the text, e.g. at line 54, page 13) We have modified this expression throughout the text according to the comment. 论文的发表终究还是取决于科研硬实力，以上技巧和经验都只是锦上添花，在论文发表方面助大家一臂之力，让我们的稿件更容易被录用。最后祝每个科研人科研丰收，生活美满！
你知道怎么回复审稿意见么
在回复审稿人意见的时候，诚恳的态度非常关键，最好可以附上一个新的cover letter。当你不同意审稿人的意见时，你可以说“Thank you for your comments. We understand your concern about XXX. However, because YYY. To make this clearer we have changed ZZZ on page/line XX.”首先站在审稿人的角度上去肯定审稿人的意见，然后客观的指出文章的原意，并且做出具体解释。从另一个角度来看，既然审稿人都理解错了，其他的读者更有可能，说明文章的表达还是需要改进的。建议对相关的句子重写，尽量表述得更加清晰。
在这里我们也分享一些常见的回复审稿人模板供题主参考：
当你同意审稿人意见时，可以这样写：
Thank you for your comments. We agree with your suggestion to XXX, because YYY. We have made changes to ZZZ on page/line XX as you suggested.
回复重点要包括以下几项：
【SCI修改稿回答审稿人意见范文模板】 List of Responses 0.1 Dear Editors and Reviewers: 1.1 Thank you for your letter and for the reviewer's comments concering our manuscript “Title”(ID: ). 1.2 Thank you very much for your careful review and constructive suggestions with regard to our manuscript "Title"(ID). 2.1 Thoses comments are very helpful for us to revise and imporve our paper. 2.2 Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the importance guiding significane to our researches. 3.1 We have studied these comments carefully and tried our best to revise and imporve the manuscript. 3.2 made great changes in the manuscript according to the reviewer's comments. 3.3 We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. 4.1 Our main corrections in the manuscript and the responds to the reviewer's comments are as follows and a PDF file "xxx.pdf" ( main corrections are marked in red and blue color ). 4.2 Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. 5.1 The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer's comments are as following: 6.1 Responds to the reviewer's comments: 6.1.1 Response to comment: [... COMMENT ...] 6.1.2 Response: ... 7.1 We are very sorry for our negligence of ... 7.2 We are very sorry for our incorrect writing ... 7.3 It is really true as Reviewer suggested that ... 7.4 we have made correction according to the Reviewer's comments. 7.5 we have re-write this part to the Reviewer's suggestion. 7.6 As Reviewer suggested that ... 7.7 Considering the Reviewer's suggestion, we have ... 7.8 Thank you for pointing this out. 8.1 Line 22-33, the statements of "... ... " were corrected as "... ..." 8.2 Line 333, "... ..." was added/deleted. 8.3 ... was usde here as .. to ... 8.4 In addition, by studying that, we can directly compare our results with previous studies. 8.5 more details in the first paragraph of Section 3.3. 8.6 A and B's research groups have done blablablabla. However, the focus of our work is on blablabla, which is very different from A and B's work, and this is also the major contribution of our work. 8.7 We have added the following discussion on this issue in our revised manuscript, see ... 9.1 Special thanks to you for your good comments. 3.3 we tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. 4.3 these changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. 5.2 And here we did not list the changes but marked in red in revised paper. 9.2 we appreciate Editors/Reviewers' warm work earnestly, and hope the correction will meet with approval. 10.1 once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions. list of actions: LOA1: The revised manuscript is double spaced / marked in red / ... LOA2: a paragraph has been added in page 5 to further explain the algorithm ... LOA3: Explanations of the legned of Figure 3 have been added in page 7. LOA4: Fig. 2 has been enlarged / changed / ... LOA5: All typos have been removed.
在回复审稿人意见的时候，诚恳的态度非常关键，最好可以附上一个新的cover letter。当你不同意审稿人的意见时，你可以说“Thank you for your comments. We understand your concern about XXX. However, because YYY. To make this clearer we have changed ZZZ on page/line XX.”首先站在审稿人的角度上去肯定审稿人的意见，然后客观的指出文章的原意，并且做出具体解释。从另一个角度来看，既然审稿人都理解错了，其他的读者更有可能，说明文章的表达还是需要改进的。建议对相关的句子重写，尽量表述得更加清晰。
在这里我们也分享一些常见的回复审稿人模板供题主参考：
当你同意审稿人意见时，可以这样写：
Thank you for your comments. We agree with your suggestion to XXX, because YYY. We have made changes to ZZZ on page/line XX as you suggested.
回复重点要包括以下几项：
方法/技巧
1、套话
在回复审稿人意见的时候，除了写明修改内容外，还有一些话是必须要写的。这个其实也可以归纳为礼貌用语，大家一般也都会注意到。但是，有些时候还是容易“放飞自我”。实验室的一位师兄，花了很长的时间搞出来一个很有idea的文章。
在回复审稿意见的时候，前面还是客客气气的回复，一读到关于自己核心idea的时候，立马心态就炸了，言辞什么的就有点过激了，最后当然直接被拒了。其实能作为审稿人，一般都是这个领域的专家或者有一定贡献的人，既然能指出你的问题，就说明还是存在不合理的地方，那就认认真真去修改就好了，千万不要太持才傲物。
比如在回复的时候，前面加上类似“谢谢您的建议，您的所有建议都非常的重要，它们对我今后的科研工作都具有重要的指导意义”；结尾也可以写上“再次谢谢您的建议，希望能够从您那里学到更多的知识。”像这种类似的套话一定要有，时刻保持谦逊。
2、审稿人意见暂时无法实现
第一种是需要你增加实验或改进实验的时候。.原则上尽量满足，实在是不行的，可适当用能说明原理的替代实验满足。当然如果为了论文尽快发表，需要拒绝这样的要求，也不要列出一堆理由来证明这个意见是不好实现的，这样只会让审稿人认为你在逃避。
还有一种就是评价创新性不足。这种几乎是没法改的。原则是需要准确地概括出本文的核心创新点。当然，首先还是要肯定审稿人说的对，他提出的方法或者已经存在的方法也很好，但本文的核心创新点在于balabala，和已经存在的方法不一样。适当的情况下可以比较下优缺点，加一些这方面的总结（觉得自己归纳的不好就别加了，以防能巧成拙）。
注意！对于这类关于创新不足的意见，一定要好好回复。一旦不被认可的话就会评判为文章没创新点，一个没有创新的文章，很难被录用。
3、审稿人意见有问题
坦白说，概率真的很小，但也不是没有。如果真的遇到了，那也不要太过于激动。大家都是有棱有角的年轻人，血气方刚，自己辛辛苦苦做出来的结果被人否定了当然不爽，尤其是对方还是错误的情况下，发几句牢骚就算了，千万别带到邮件里。子还曾经曰过：人非圣贤孰能无过。要注意言辞，一定不能在文中带有“审稿人的意见是错的”这样的句子。
不要对他的意见发表任何的评论，就在那条审稿意见下，列出你的理由和证据就可以了，也不用刻意强调你的观点是正确的。
4、注意回复时间
把握好回复的时间尺度，原则上是不能让编辑觉得你过于草率，不够重视（更不能超过deadline）。要根据具体的修改意见，掌握好修改时间。即使是minor revision，意见比较少的，只需要花一天甚至几小时搞定的，也不要立刻投回去。
至少一周后再投出去，因为在这一周里你还要充足的时间去检查论文里的小毛病，更重要的是，编辑不会觉得你是在敷衍他。如果是major revision，建议至少三周后再投，修改到尽量符合审稿意见上的要求。否则一旦让你重修，将会浪费更多的时间精力。
觉得自己英语不是很好的童鞋，也不要灰心，其实专业词汇就那些。在这里分享一个简单粗暴提升专业英语水平的方法，直接背。其实看似一篇十几页的论文，文字较多的部分也就开头和结尾多一些（理工科一般这样，其它的不清楚，应该差不多）。注意，背诵的对象一定是大牛或高水平的英文文献。
另外，在我大天朝，有需求就会有市场。不过目前市场上提供论文润色服务的机构鱼龙混杂，挑选的时候一定要独具慧眼。千万别找非专业人员润色，很可能失之毫厘谬以千里，学术论文还是很严谨的。
写作思路：根据题目要求，对于硕士论文评阅意见中不认可的部分，可以进行委婉的反驳，反驳内容不以针对对方的意见为主，而是多申述己方对于论文文献的理解，从另外的角度来表达，范文：
十分感谢您对文章内容的指点，该篇文章主要体现出较强的时代特色性与实践应用性，对于创新点稍欠缺，语言凝练的还不够等方面，今后会更加往这方面努力，对于部分论点的论证还缺乏说服力该问题，根据您的指点，以下进行补充：
1、xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx。
2、xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx。
再次谢谢您的建议，希望能够从您哪里学到更多的知识。
问题一：如何回复SCI投稿审稿人意见 第三个审稿人的意见如下： Reviewer #3: The present paper addresses a hot topic of interest in the area. The first part section the paper presents a brief and concise state of the art of the domain approached. Since this topic has been intensively studied during the last decade and a large number of papers and books have been published, this part might be extended to include the most recent research in this domain, and have to be included in Chapter +References: R.O. Preda, D.N. Vizireanu, Blind Watermarking Capacity Analysis of MPEG2 Coded Video, IEEE TELSIKS 2007, 8th International Conference on Telemunications in Modern Satellite, Cable and Broadcasting Services, 26-28 Sept. 2007, Nis, Serbia and Montenegro, p. 465-468. D.N. VIZIREANU, R.O Preda, BD Milovanovic, A New Digital Watermarking scheme for Image Copyright Protection using Wavelet Packets, IEEE TELSIKS 2005, 7th Intern. Conf. on Telem. in Modern Satellite, Cable and Broadcasting Services, 28-30 September 2005, Nis, Serbia and Montenegro, p. 518-521. Some interesting papers have been published recently in CS&SP and have to be included in Chapter 1 +References. The authors contribution is not clearly underlined. Moreover, the performance design criteria are not addressed in the simulation part. The simulation results presented are sometimes uncler. The abbreviations presented in figures are not clear and should be explained in more detail. The results should be more emphasized and the concl......>> 问题二：sci第二次修改 该怎么写回复信件 List of Responses Dear Editors and Reviewers: Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ ments concerning ourmanuscript entitled “Paper Title” (ID: 文章稿号). Those ments are all valuable and very helpfulfor revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guidingsignificance to our researches. We have studied ments carefully and havemade correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked inred in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to thereviewer’s ments are as flowing: Responds to the reviewer’s ments: Reviewer #1: 1. Response to ment: (……简要列出意见……) Response: ×××××× 2. Response to ment: (……简要列出意见……) Response: ×××××× 。。。。。。 逐条意见回答，切忌一定不能有遗漏 针对不同的问题有下列几个礼貌术语可适当用用： 问题三：如何回复SCI投稿审稿人意见 给范文：Response to ments Dear Editors and Reviewers: Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ ments concerning our manuscript entitled xxxxxxxxxxxxxx. Those ments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied ments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s ments are as following: ments:（列举提问题切忌要遗漏任何项） 1. ......... Please check and revise. 2. .......... Please revise. 3. .......... Response:（表示遗憾谢并且详细说明改进程/或解释审稿疑惑要详细题号要应面问题编号） 1. We are very sorry for our unclear report in...... 2. It is our negligence and we are sorry about this. According to ment, related content have been improved. ....... 3. As the Reviewer's good advice, ....... Special thanks to you for your good ments. 20xx-xx-xx 国外审稿人是义务的，可以根据文章质量和自己的看法自由地提出意见和建议。国外审稿人绝大多数治学严谨，很注重reputation，可以说拿信誉当生 命。当他们接到审稿要求时，如果很忙或不懂你的专业或领域，他们会decline。但只要答应审稿，一般都是尽职尽责的完成审稿任务。因此，当你接到审稿 人的意见时，首先要摆正心态，保持冷静。不要用偏见的心态去断定审稿人有偏见、歧视。做研究的确很辛苦，发表文章也确实很不容易。但审稿人同 样也很辛苦，也很不容易。他们认认真真地阅读你的文章，给你提出中肯的意见，甚至很好的建议。如果还被你措辞强硬的怪罪一阵，换着谁也会生气。要知道，找 理由拒绝一篇文章并不是一件很难的事情。因此，这个时候，你一定要好好的静下心来，好好分析sci论文发表审稿人的意见，找出问题的所在。 1.所有问题必须逐条回答；2.尽量满足意见中需要补充的实验；3.满足不了的也不要回避，说明不能做的合理理由；4。对于你不认同的意见，也要委婉有技巧地回答，做到有理有据有节；5. 审稿人推荐的文献一定要引用，并加以讨论。...>> 问题四：论文审稿意见怎么写 我以前的博士论文，评阅人就是根据我论文里的摘要写的，精炼一下就OK了。评阅书里面应该有自己写的创新点，你可以参照写一下。leonshane(站内联系TA)首先对这篇论文进行简单概括，指出其主要线索：研究目标、方法、意义、创新等，然后指出一两个最大的问题，如果其问题的确是致命的话，那么久建议修改。 你写完你导师会帮你把关的，如果他不看，建议你申请换导师。。。shuoyeb(站内联系TA)一、概况评价项目：论文的创新性成果 论文的学术价值及应用价值 论文反映出作者的基础理论和专门知识水平论文写作论文总体评价 二、综合所有评阅人对论文的学术评语 （选题的意义，论文的创新性成果，学术价值及应用价值，实验结果和计算数据的合理性及可靠性等）……三、论文中存在的问题、不足及意见或建议 1. 评议人认为第*章第*节****中有****的问题*****。 2. ……lbh535(站内联系TA)评审意见应点面结合。面就是总体概况，而点则至少体现评阅人有没有仔细看内容。现在好多论文评审一审就是一大批，特别是社会科学方面的，评阅意见都写些泛泛而谈的东西，感觉评阅人就没太仔细看。qiuqu_200212(站内联系TA)建议答辩，然后简单写些评语即可。k10001(站内联系TA)还有一段八股：论文表明，***在所研究领域掌握了坚实宽广的基础理论和系统深入的专门知识，具备了（很强的）独立从事科学研究工作的能力，论文（具有创新性，）达到了博士论文学术水平。建议组织博士学位论文答辩。nono2009(站内联系TA)评阅表中有提示的，按提示要求的几项内容写评阅意见即可。songjm12(站内联系TA)好好阅读评审书前两页要求部分 写好评语就行了yuffey(站内联系TA)研究问题清晰不，研究目标明确不，方法得当不，结果明显不？ 工作量饱满不，内容充实不？等等 最好的方法是，找个以前的博士论文，抄写抄写。八股文~~ 问题五：sci怎么回复审稿意见 小木虫 问: sci投稿，四个审稿人，两个提了问题，两个改的格式，一个在原文上改，直接发的pdf，估计修改的有一百多处吧，另一个提出第几页第几行改什么等等，编辑要求在修订模式下修改原文，我还需要一一回复修改格式的审稿人么，如何回复他修改的格式呢，他没有提问题，只帮我改了格式。 答: 原则上不用~ 既然在修订模式下进行~ 就一次到位~ 问题六：sci审稿意见回复写在一封信里吗 需要啊~ 而且最好有一个word文档逐条去回复审稿人的意见以及你是如何修改的，并且在修改稿里面用不同的颜色标注出你所修改的部分。 回复审稿意见一定要认真。谦虚这方面，你可以从他提的问题去判断审稿人的水平。如果提的问题明显外行，可以强势一些。不是说每个问题都要修改，但是每个问题都要回应。 问题七：大修审稿意见，重金求教如何回复 投稿Energy，35天后返回修改，给的大修，求教有经验的虫友如何回复审稿意见比较好。另外，为什么附件里只有一个人的审稿人意见？Dear***, The review of this paper is now plete, and I am including the Reviewers' reports (directly at the end of this email and sometimes as attachments). As you can see, one Reviewer remends rejection, and the others remend possible reconsideration after major revisions. If you are able to revise the manuscript thoroughly in response to the Reviewers' ments, I believe that it would be suitable for second review. I should add that, in view of the strong critici *** s, anything but a thorough response and revision would just be an unfortunate waste of time. Once you have revised the paper accordingly, please submit with it a note describing in detail your response to these ments and a separate copy of the revised paper marked up to indicate where the revisions were made. NOTE: Upon submitting your revised manuscript, please upload the source files for your article. For additional details regarding acceptable file formats, please refer to the Guide for Authors at: elsevier/...uthors When submitting your revised paper, we ask that you include the following items: Manuscript and Figure Source Files (mandatory) We cannot acmodate PDF manuscript files for production purposes. We also ask that when submitting your revision you follow the journal fo......>> 问题八：如何回复编辑和审稿人 回复审稿人的格式很简单，先感谢审稿人的宝贵意见，接着说已经按照要求修改过了，然后就是修改的明细，通常是一问一答，先是审稿人的意见，然后是自己的回答。 问题九：工科类文章审稿意见怎么写 英文 工科类文章审稿意见 Review ments on the article of Engineering 工科类文章审稿意见 Review ments on the article of Engineering 问题十：论文接收 英文审稿意见 怎么写 ①正确性：论点的说服力根植于对客观事物的正确反映，而这又取决于作者的立场、观点、态度、方法是否正确，如果论点本身不正确，甚至是荒谬的，再怎么论证也不能说服人。因此，论点正确是论文的最起码的要求。 ②鲜明性：赞成什么、反对什么，要非常鲜明，千万不能模棱两可，含糊不清。 ③新颖性：论点应该尽可能新颖、深刻，能超出他人的见解，不是重复他人的老生常谈，也不是无关痛痒、流于一般的泛泛而谈，应该尽可能独特、新颖。
在回复审稿人意见的时候，诚恳的态度非常关键，最好可以附上一个新的cover letter。当你不同意审稿人的意见时，你可以说“Thank you for your comments. We understand your concern about XXX. However, because YYY. To make this clearer we have changed ZZZ on page/line XX.”首先站在审稿人的角度上去肯定审稿人的意见，然后客观的指出文章的原意，并且做出具体解释。从另一个角度来看，既然审稿人都理解错了，其他的读者更有可能，说明文章的表达还是需要改进的。建议对相关的句子重写，尽量表述得更加清晰。
在这里我们也分享一些常见的回复审稿人模板供题主参考：
当你同意审稿人意见时，可以这样写：
Thank you for your comments. We agree with your suggestion to XXX, because YYY. We have made changes to ZZZ on page/line XX as you suggested.
回复重点要包括以下几项：
科研人想要成功发表一篇SCI，往往要经历写作、投稿、等待这一系列漫长的过程，当在收到一篇文章返修意见的时候心里别提有多激动了。 收到返修意见说明文章已经被审稿人初步认可，为了让自己的心血不被浪费，文章能顺利发表，我们要花时间和经历去回复审稿意见，这就要求大家除了具备专业性之外，还要注意回复的语气、格式等细节 本篇文章笔者 手把手教各位科研人如何高情商回复 Reviewers ，很纯的干货，认真读完相信你一定有所收获！ 1. 阅读返修意见 首先要认真阅读全部审稿意见，一般每篇文章会有 2-3 个审稿人的意见，每位审稿人的意见数量可能一两条到十几条不等。每位审稿人的意见一般会逐条列出。在阅读退修意见的过程中，我们要清楚目的，首先是弄懂每一条意见，充分 get 审稿人的要求。 其次要对所有意见有一个归纳整理，分清主次。 最后要注意除文章内容之外的一些要求，如文章修回的 deadline，补充完善作者信息等。 2. 制定回复策略 当认真读完审稿人意见之后，建议大家将所有意见复制粘贴到 word 文档，对所列意见逐条分析。根据笔者经验，所有意见可以根据难易程度分为简单、复杂、困难这三种。 下面笔者将以一些既往文章收到过的退修意见为例来向大家说明： 简单的一般是改正错别词、语法，规范格式，补充缩写词全称，提高图片质量，等等。如图 1： 图1 复杂的一般指我们通过查阅文献之后即可用事实依据解答审稿人的疑问，比如为什么选择某个药物、某个实验对象等，因为审稿人有时不一定是你所研究领域的专家，所以我们用事实说话解开审稿人的疑惑也就成功回答了这类问题。如图 2： 图2 困难的一般是指审稿人对文章涉及到的方法、结果、结论等的质疑，这些就需要各位认真斟酌，谨慎回答，切记要有理有据。如图 3： 图3 3. 编辑回复内容 分析过审稿人意见之后，我们就可以着手回复了，下面几条划重点啦： （1）我们注意要对所有的退修意见逐条进行回复 在每条意见下面写上相应回复内容，一般回复的结构为：感谢审稿人的意见+已修改的内容。可以写感谢审稿人善意的提醒/严谨的态度/专业的意见等等，表达出我们虚心学习的态度。 （2）在回复的正文内容的首和尾要分别有一段前言和一段总结 回复的语气一定要诚恳且礼貌，在内容中除了要说明修改的内容之外，还要体现感谢编辑和审稿人对文章的认可以及辛苦的工作。 （3）在回复内容的最后写上「如果有任何问题请随时联系」类似的话 这样既显示了我们认真的态度，也间接表达了我们期盼回复的心情。 （4）如有引用文献回答审稿人问题的，需在回答内容后面附上所参考文献的 DOI 编号，论点+论据会更能使审稿人信服。 下面图 4 为笔者常用的回复审稿人意见的模板，提供给大家参考。 图4 虽然每个人的稿件情况不同，回复信也都是千差万别，但多多少少还是有一定模板性的，尤其是对于第一次遇到这种情况的研究生朋友们，可以先从模板开始熟悉一下此类回复信的大体内容和形式。 模板1：精简版本 下面这个是我自己以前写的一个模板，拿出来分享给大家。 Dear Editor XX and Reviewers, Thanks very much for taking your time to review this manuscript. I really appreciate all your comments and suggestions! Please find my itemized responses in below and my revisions/corrections in the re-submitted files. （这一段基本上是套话） Thanks again! 下面就开始回复文章的审稿意见了，一般首先是回复期刊编辑的整体意见： SUGGESTIONS FROM EDITOR（注意这一段要把编辑原始的建议粘贴在这里，不能只有回应） Your response to the general comments from the editor 接下来是逐条回应审稿人的建议： COMMENTS TO THE AUTHOR: Reviewer #1: Response to the questions one by one Reviewer #2: Response to the questions one by one 模板2: 完整版本 这个模板是完整版本，保留了很多逐条回答审稿人的常用短语和句式，值得收藏和学习！ Dear Editor, Dear reviewers Thank you for your letter dated February 22. We were pleased to know that our work was rated as potentially acceptable for publication in Journal, subject to adequate revision. We thank the reviewers for the time and effort that they have put into reviewing the previous version of the manuscript. Their suggestions have enabled us to improve our work. Based on the instructions provided in your letter, we uploaded the file of the revised manuscript. Accordingly, we have uploaded a copy of the original manuscript with all the changes highlighted by using the track changes mode in MS Word. Appended to this letter is our point-by-point response to the comments raised by the reviewers. The comments are reproduced and our responses are given directly afterward in a different color (red). We would like also to thank you for allowing us to resubmit a revised copy of the manuscript. We hope that the revised manuscript is accepted for publication in the Journal of Mountain Science. Sincerely, XXXXXXX （同样是套话，这个模板写了这么长。。。虽然我不是很喜欢，但是适合拿来逐句学习，为己所用） Reviewer 1： Comments to the Author 这个审稿人的意见分为两部分： 第一部分是一般性的评论和修改建议（多为比较大的问题）。 Here are the general comments from the reviewer... We thank the reviewer for the very interesting comment. In fact… Regarding the suggestion about the methods, we changed this part… Another issue on the methodological section is that... We are grateful for the suggestion. To be more clear and in accordance with the reviewer concerns, we have added a brief description as follows: “ 接下来是第二部分“小的建议”，也就是需要逐条回复的那种，一般是用词用句的修改。 Minor comments: The title is too long, I suggest shortening. Modified throughout the text according to the comment (Line 20, page 1).Thank you for the title suggested. The precedent version of the title has been replaced, becoming... Line 25, page 1… Modified throughout the text according to the comment (Line 20, page 1). Line 18, page 2… We have modified the sentence according to the previous comment (Line 30, page 2). Line 33, page 3… Thank you for underlining this deficiency. This section was revised and modified according to the information showed in the work suggested by the reviewer (Line 41, page 3). Line 59, page 5… This phrase was modified according to the comment (Line 30, page 5). Lines 9-24, page 6… Thank you for the suggestion. We have added the information required as explained above (Lines 6-28, page 6). Line 11, page 6… This sentence was rephrased according to the comment (Line 8, page 6). Line 35, page 13: “exit section”->”outlet” (please check also throughout the text, e.g. at line 54, page 13) We have modified this expression throughout the text according to the comment. 论文的发表终究还是取决于科研硬实力，以上技巧和经验都只是锦上添花，在论文发表方面助大家一臂之力，让我们的稿件更容易被录用。最后祝每个科研人科研丰收，生活美满！