【英文论文审稿意见汇总】英文论文审稿意见模板
作者&投稿：仪哀 （若有异议请与网页底部的电邮联系）
2011-04-24 19:24
以下12点无轻重主次之分。每一点内容由总结性标题和代表性审稿人意见构成。
1、目标和结果不清晰。
It is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing by someone with expertise in technical English editing paying particular attention to English grammar, spelling, and sentence structure so that the goals and results of the study are clear to the reader.
2、未解释研究方法或解释不充分。
◆ In general, there is a lack of explanation of replicates and statistical me thods used in the study.
◆ Furthermore, an explanation of why the authors did these various experiments should be provided.
3、对于研究设计的rationale:
Also, there are few explanations of the rationale for the study design.
4、夸张地陈述结论/夸大成果/不严谨：
The conclusions are overstated. For example, the study did not show
if the side effects from initial copper burst can be avoid with the polymer formulation.
5、对hypothesis的清晰界定：
A hypothesis needs to be presented。
6、对某个概念或工具使用的rationale/定义概念：
What was the rationale for the film/SBF volume ratio?
7、对研究问题的定义：
Try to set the problem discussed in this paper in more clear,
write one section to define the problem
8、如何凸现原创性以及如何充分地写literature review:
The topic is novel but the application proposed is not so novel.
9、对claim,如A＞B的证明，verification:
There is no experimental comparison of the algorithm with previously known work, so it is impossible to judge whether the algorithm is an improvement on previous work.
10、严谨度问题：
MNQ is easier than the primitive PNQS, how to prove that.
11、格式（重视程度）：
◆ In addition, the list of references is not in our style. It is close but not completely correct. I have attached a pdf file with "Instructions for Authors" which shows examples.
◆ Before submitting a revision be sure that your material is properly prepared and
formatted. If you are unsure, please consult the formatting nstructions to authors that are given under the "Instructions and Forms" button in he upper right-hand corner of the screen.
12、语言问题（出现最多的问题）：
有关语言的审稿人意见：
◆ It is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing by someone with expertise in technical English editing paying particular attention to English grammar, spelling, and sentence structure so that the goals and results of the study are clear to the reader. ◆ The authors must have their work reviewed by a proper translation/reviewing service before submission; only then can a proper review be performed. Most sentences contain grammatical and/or spelling mistakes or are not complete sentences.
◆ As presented, the writing is not acceptable for the journal. There are pro
blems with sentence structure, verb tense, and clause construction.
◆ The English of your manuscript must be improved before resubmission. We str ongly suggest that you obtain assistance from a colleague who is well-versed i
n English or whose native language is English.
◆ Please have someone competent in the English language and the subject matte r of your paper go over the paper and correct it. ?
◆ the quality of English needs improving.
来自编辑的鼓励：
Encouragement from reviewers:
◆ I would be very glad to re-review the paper in greater depth once it has be
en edited because the subject is interesting.
◆ There is continued interest in your manuscript titled "……" which you subm
itted to the Journal of Biomedical Materials Research: Part B - Applied Biomat
erials.
◆ The Submission has been greatly improved and is worthy of publication.
本文来自CSDN博客，转载请标明出处：
老外写的英文综述文章的审稿意见
Ms. Ref. No.: ******
Title: ******
Materials Science and Engineering
Dear Dr. ******,
Reviewers have now commented on your p
aper. You will see that they are advising that you revise your manuscript. If you are
prepared to undertake the work required, I would be pleased to reconsider my decision. For your guidance, reviewers" comments are appended below.
Reviewer #1: This work proposes an extensive review on micromulsion-based methods for the synthesis of Ag nanoparticles. As such, the matter is of interest, however the paper suffers for two serious limits:
1) the overall quality of the English language is rather poor;
2) some Figures must be selected from previous literature to discuss also the synthesis of anisotropically shaped Ag nanoparticles (there are several examples published), which has been largely overlooked throughout the paper. ;
Once the above concerns are fully addressed, the manuscript could be accepted for publication in this journal
来源:.htm
这是一篇全过程我均比较了解的投稿，稿件的内容我认为是相当不错的，中文版投稿于业内有较高影响的某核心期刊，并很快得到发表。其时我作为审稿人之一，除了提出一些修改建议外，还特建议了5篇应增加的参考文献，该文正式发表时共计有参考文献25篇。
作者或许看到审稿意见还不错，因此决意尝试向美国某学会主办的一份英文刊投稿。几经修改和补充后，请一位英文“功底"较好的中国人翻译，投稿后约3周，便返回了三份审稿意见。
从英文刊的反馈意见看，这篇稿件中最严重的问题是文献综述和引用不够，其次是语言表达方面的欠缺，此外是论证过程和结果展示形式方面的不足。
感想：一篇好的论文，从内容到形式都需要精雕细琢。
附1：中译审稿意见
审稿意见—1
(1) 英文表达太差，尽管意思大致能表达清楚，但文法错误太多。
(2) 文献综述较差，观点或论断应有文献支持。
(3) 论文读起来像是XXX的广告，不知道作者与XXX是否没有关联。
(4) 该模式的创新性并非如作者所述，目前有许多XX采取此模式（如美国地球物理学会），作者应详加调查并分析XXX运作模式的创新点。
(5) 该模式也不是作者所说的那样成功……(审稿人结合论文中的数据具体分析) 审稿意见—2
(1) 缺少直接相关的文献引用(如…)。
(2) 写作质量达不到美国学术期刊的标准。
审稿意见—3
(1) 作者应着重指出指出本人的贡献。
(2) 缺少支持作者发现的方法学分析。
(3) 需要采用表格和图件形式展示(数据)材料。
附2：英文审稿意见(略有删节)
Reviewer: 1
There are many things wrong with this paper.
The English is very bad. Although the meaning is by and large clear, not too
many sentences are correct.
The literature review is poor. The paper is riddled with assertions and claims that should be supported by references.
The paper reads as an advertisement for XXX. It is not clear that the author is independent of XXX.
The AA model of XXX is not as innovative as the author claims. There are now many XX that follow this model (American Geophysical Union, for example), and the author should survey these model to see which one first introduced the elements of the XXX model.
The model is also not as successful as the author claims. ……
Overall, the presentation and the contents of the paper can only mean that I reject that the paper be rejected.
Reviewer: 2
The are two major problems with this paper:
(1) It is missing the context of (and citations to) what is now know as the "two-sided" market literature including that directly related to … (e.g.
Braunstein, JASIS 1977; Economides & Katsanakas, Mgt. Sci., 2006; McCabe & Snyder, B.E. J Econ Analysis, 2007).
(2) The writing quality is not up to the standard of a US scholarly journal. Reviewer: 3
1. The author should accentuate his contributions in this manuscript.
2. It lacks analytical methodologies to support author’s discoveries.
3. Description style material like this manuscript requires structured tables & figures for better presentations.
plos的UnderReview是什么阶段
审稿阶段。undeReview是英文论文发表中的一种状态，意为正在审核中，说明文章正处于审稿阶段，英文论文发表需要作者对文章发表各个过程的状态把握，特别是通过系统投稿发表的英文论文，我们需要经常登录系统查看文章状态，如果文章进入下一环节后又再次返回undeReview状态，这可能是由于审稿人意见相左导致，编辑可能...
SCI论文投稿都经历了哪些状态?
（2）Editor Declined Invitation：如果编辑接手处理了就会邀请审稿人了。3. With editor：后送审可能出现的两种状态（Decision Letter Being Prepared或Reviewers invited）：提示一：Decision Letter Being Prepared就是编辑没找审稿人就自己决定了，一般情况下比较悲剧。一来可能是英文太差，需要语言sci润色。
under review后面的审稿人会看到前面审稿人的意见吗
不能因为稿件需要分别参考两个审稿人的意见，如果后面的审稿人可以看到前面审稿人的意见，则存在串通嫌疑。under review是英文论文发表中的一种状态，意为正在审核中，说明文章正处于审稿阶段，英文论文发表需要作者对文章发表各个过程的状态一一把握，特别是通过系统投稿发表的英文论文，我们需要经常登录系统...
英文sci论文的结论一般怎么写
这些论文的通病你都犯过吗？每年都有来自中国的大量学术文章涌向高影响因子国际期刊，这些文章良莠不齐，有的被拒，有的大修，可谓是前赴后继。这些文章中很多都犯了一些通病，直接影响了文章的收录，今天为大家分享一些这些论文通病，希望给作者们以参考，对症下药，才能药到病除。1、 引言解释不清，...
英文投稿信怎么写?
原创与作者同意书：在投稿信的最后，必须声明论文没有在其他期刊等待发表，所有作者皆阅读过全文并同意投稿期刊。除了以上必要信息，有写期刊会要求其他信息，帮助期刊编辑审核，作者要注意期刊的相关规定。推荐审稿人：大部分的期刊都会鼓励作者推荐审稿人，甚至是不希望由谁来担任审稿人，这个动作有助于编辑...
EI论文如何在审稿中脱颖而出?
作为一篇论文的开始部分，一个标题和一段摘要对于能否吸引更多审稿人、编辑、读者继续阅读全文有着至关重要的作用。有时，在标题中善用冒号、破折号，或采用疑问句式的标题，可能使其更具有吸引力。除此之外，对于英文论文来说，在撰写投稿信(cover letter)时，也可在其中突出稿件的创新性、重要意义以及...
被录用的会议论文里稍微有一处拼写错误,影响发表吗
虽然只有一处，不过还是慎重点的好，能修改就修改。由于英语不是母语的缘故，我们的写的文章很多时候都存在语言问题。例如投稿时，达不到国际期刊的出版标准，审稿意见常常给加上这么一句话：the English language needs significantly improved。作为对审稿意见的回应，编辑也会要求作者找英语母语的人来润色...
求助,SCI审稿意见回来了,提了很多意见,不太清楚需要后续步骤
修改内容如英文语法，、表达叙述、编辑格式、表格、插图、等等。需要注意的是，文章返回作者修改并不代表文章已经被接受，这还要看后期作者的修改情况是否最终符合审稿人及主编的要求。一般退给作者修改的材料包括原稿、审稿人意见和一封编辑的信。当作者收到修稿要求后，首先应该仔细地阅读退修信和审稿专家...
EI英文期刊一般审稿多久?
据小编了解，EI英文期刊一般审稿周期在两到三个月左右(仅参考)。但其实与审稿也有一定关系，一般来说，EI期刊审稿是比较快的，只要论文质量过关，那么返修的几率就比较小，审稿也就比较快。ei英文期刊基本的步骤 (1)选择刊物 ①先查EI检索来源期刊主题目录，确定稿件的主题范围;查JCR收录期刊最新影响因子...
浅谈英文SCI论文的Abstract和Summary的区别
发表英文SCI论文是为了更广泛地交流，这中间的过程是否也是交流的一部分？此外，不光是语言，不同的理念也很容易造成隔阂。在论文审稿过程中，作者和审稿人之间，尤其当双方来自两个不同的文化背景时，包容对方的思维理念，避免摩擦，比互相不买账甚至斗气更实惠，结果可能也对双方都有利。对年青的学者...
示玉补脾： At a first glance, this short manuscript seems an interesting piece of work, reporting on ***. Fine, good quality, but all this has been done and published, and nearly become a well-known phenomenon. Therefore, there is insufficient novelty or ...
荔城区19650736375： 英文审稿意见怎么写 - ？
示玉补脾： e shouted. And amid a cheer from the ship, the two boat
荔城区19650736375： 工科类文章审稿意见怎么写 英文 - ？
示玉补脾： 工科类文章审稿意见 Review comments on the article of Engineering 工科类文章审稿意见 Review comments on the article of Engineering
荔城区19650736375： 英文 毕业论文评阅意见 怎么写 - ？
示玉补脾： 毕业论文评阅意见 The graduation thesis review comments 毕业论文评阅意见 The graduation thesis review comments
荔城区19650736375： 论文审稿意见怎么写 - ？
示玉补脾： 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...
荔城区19650736375： 论文接收 英文审稿意见 怎么写 - ？
示玉补脾： 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.
荔城区19650736375： 英文科技论文的审稿意见怎么写 - ？
示玉补脾： 1.原创性和显著性是论文的生命. 正如邹承鲁院士等在“再论科学道德问题”中指出,在国际核心刊物发表的论文,原则上都应当是“在国际上首次”描述的新的观测和实验事实,首次提出的概念和模型,首次建立的方程,也包括对已有的重大观测(实验)事实的.
荔城区19650736375： 化工类英文文章审稿 一般都提些什么意见 - ？
示玉补脾： 1、目标和结果不清晰.It is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing by someone with expertise in technical English editing paying particular attention to English grammar, spelling, and sentence structure so that the goals and results of the ...
荔城区19650736375： 论文review评审意见一般有哪些 - ？
示玉补脾： 通过,退稿,发回修改,无非就是这三种.如果说具体的评审意见,那就要看论文是发到哪里评审,也要看论文的具体内容了,国际期刊十篇里能有一篇通过就不错了.
荔城区19650736375： 英文论文需添加文献的审稿意见怎么写 - ？
示玉补脾： 议论文是对某个问题或某件事进行分析、评论,表明自己的观点、立场、态度、看法和主张的一种文体.议论文有三要素,即论点、论据和论证.阐述作者的立场和观点的一种文体.这类文章或从正面提出某种见解、主张,或是驳斥别人的观点.新闻报刊中的评论、杂文、说法或日常生活中的思想感受等,都属于议论文的范畴.这类文章或从正面提出某种见解、主张,或是驳斥别人的观点.杂文、说法或日常生活中的思想感受等,都属于议论文的范畴.
