※ 引述《pintun (Pintun)》之铭言： : 1. 领域：atomic force microscopy, elastic properties at phase boundary : 2. 期刊名称：Scientific Reports (Impact Factor for 2013: 5.078) : 3. 结果：Accepted : 4. 投稿後大约多久才收到结果： : Submission 2014-11-04 : Peer Review 2014-11-19 : Accepted 2014-12-31 : 5. Reviewer的数目：1 : 完全没有Comment，不需要修改，建议直接接受 Scientific Reports是open access期刊，我刚好当过几次reviewer。 我把Scientific Reports要求reviewer审稿的原则po在下面，这样大家在知道他们家重视 的重点是什麽之後，对於投稿可能会有些帮助。Open access期刊通常比较不重视novelty ，下面第二段有写。另外，Open access期刊通常都要收费，而且很贵。我的建议是，对 於刚入行的学者或学生，在经费没问题的前提下Scientific Reports是很好的入门，因为 NPG比起其他出版社的open access期刊，要求还是高很多，除了novelty外整体还是在水 准之上。但是长远来看，磨练研究的novelty还是躲不掉的苦工，最好不要对open access 的高接受率上瘾。我认识的人里面已经开始有广用open access凑SCI篇数的倾向，不是好 现象。 To be considered for publication in Scientific Reports, a paper should be technically sound. Technical soundness refers to both methods and analysis, i.e. the methods must be appropriate and properly conducted, and the conclusions drawn must be fully supported by the data. Referees are asked not to make a judgement on the paper's importance - we ask the scientific community to make this judgement themselves post-publication. Scientific Reports, unlike other journals published by Nature Publishing Group, does not, therefore, require an advance within a given field, and there is no requirement for novelty or broad interest. The review form will rapidly allow you to provide feedback in the following areas: - Is the paper technically sound? - Are the claims convincing? If not, what further evidence is needed? - Are the claims fully supported by the experimental data? - Are the claims appropriately discussed in the context of previous literature? - If the manuscript is unacceptable in its present form, does the study seem sufficiently promising that the authors should be encouraged to consider a resubmission in the future? In addition to answering the previous questions, you can provide further information as free-text, including comments that may answer the following: - Is the manuscript clearly written? If not, how could it be made more accessible? - Have the authors done themselves justice without overselling their claims? - Have they been fair in their treatment of previous literature? - Have they provided sufficient methodological detail that the experiments could be reproduced? - Is the statistical analysis of the data sound? - Are there any special ethical concerns arising from the use of animals or human subjects? --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc), 来自: 114.27.47.221 ※ 文章网址: http://webptt.com/cn.aspx?n=bbs/PhD/M.1420381867.A.3D7.html