d*****s
发帖数: 647 | 1 投稿到一个IF>10的杂志，经过De nonvo，Major，Minor，持续快一年，最后Reviewer
都没有问题，推荐Ready for Publication，但Editor说it does not have sufficient
priority for publication，把稿子给拒了。
感觉Editor特别操蛋，既然达不到priority ，还要我们来回修改4次干嘛，大家有没有
碰到类似情况的？这种情况下该怎么办，接受事实？抗议成功的可能性大吗？ |
g*c
发帖数: 68 | 2 赶快投BBRC，没准Editor的稿子已经在印刷中了呢。 |
A******y
发帖数: 2041 | 3 Science and Nature do that.
Reviewer
sufficient
【在 d*****s 的大作中提到】
: 投稿到一个IF>10的杂志，经过De nonvo，Major，Minor，持续快一年，最后Reviewer
: 都没有问题，推荐Ready for Publication，但Editor说it does not have sufficient
: priority for publication，把稿子给拒了。
: 感觉Editor特别操蛋，既然达不到priority ，还要我们来回修改4次干嘛，大家有没有
: 碰到类似情况的？这种情况下该怎么办，接受事实？抗议成功的可能性大吗？
|
k****y
发帖数: 26 | 4 曝光一下是哪个牛刊。这个肯定要申述一下吧。
：Science and Nature do that.
： |
d*****s
发帖数: 647 | 5 European Heart Journal
不知道是不是对来自中国文章的歧视？
【在 k****y 的大作中提到】
: 曝光一下是哪个牛刊。这个肯定要申述一下吧。
:
: ：Science and Nature do that.
: ：
|
c*********l
发帖数: 1065 | 6 靠，真是无奇不有，这理由。。
Reviewer
sufficient
【在 d*****s 的大作中提到】
: 投稿到一个IF>10的杂志，经过De nonvo，Major，Minor，持续快一年，最后Reviewer
: 都没有问题，推荐Ready for Publication，但Editor说it does not have sufficient
: priority for publication，把稿子给拒了。
: 感觉Editor特别操蛋，既然达不到priority ，还要我们来回修改4次干嘛，大家有没有
: 碰到类似情况的？这种情况下该怎么办，接受事实？抗议成功的可能性大吗？
|
e**********0
发帖数: 502 | 7 Re
【在 g*c 的大作中提到】
: 赶快投BBRC，没准Editor的稿子已经在印刷中了呢。
|
m******g
发帖数: 3924 | |
H*****e
发帖数: 120 | 9 I do not believe that what they claimed is the real reason. My guess is
that there is something behind it. As an editor, I can read a "confidential
" section to editor only, which is not common in my experience. But I did
have a few cases that reviewers questioned the quality of the work. I need
to draw a conclusion based on that. As a reviewer, I also once questioned a
study and asked more control experiments regarding to the method. The
responses from the authors were the "perfect" answer. It was too good to me
. So I wrote my only time "confidential" section to editor; then we had a
discussion on the phone about it. In that case, we draw a conclusion that
we are not at the position to judge beyond the data provided. However, it
could go the other way if I insisted. The journal that you mentioned is not
the top one. There is no priority issue in my opinion unless you send a
cancer paper to this heart journal. |
l****a
发帖数: 179 | 10 欧洲的杂志都奇葩
【在 d*****s 的大作中提到】
: European Heart Journal
: 不知道是不是对来自中国文章的歧视？
|
d*****s
发帖数: 647 | 11 谢谢您的解释，看来是有些评委私下对编辑说了一些不好的话。但是我们并不知道，我
们能Appeal一下吗，该怎么Appeal？
confidential
need
a
me
【在 H*****e 的大作中提到】
: I do not believe that what they claimed is the real reason. My guess is
: that there is something behind it. As an editor, I can read a "confidential
: " section to editor only, which is not common in my experience. But I did
: have a few cases that reviewers questioned the quality of the work. I need
: to draw a conclusion based on that. As a reviewer, I also once questioned a
: study and asked more control experiments regarding to the method. The
: responses from the authors were the "perfect" answer. It was too good to me
: . So I wrote my only time "confidential" section to editor; then we had a
: discussion on the phone about it. In that case, we draw a conclusion that
: we are not at the position to judge beyond the data provided. However, it
|
