※ 引述《pintun (Pintun)》之銘言： : 1. 領域：atomic force microscopy, elastic properties at phase boundary : 2. 期刊名稱：Scientific Reports (Impact Factor for 2013: 5.078) : 3. 結果：Accepted : 4. 投稿後大約多久才收到結果： : Submission 2014-11-04 : Peer Review 2014-11-19 : Accepted 2014-12-31 : 5. Reviewer的數目：1 : 完全沒有Comment，不需要修改，建議直接接受 Scientific Reports是open access期刊，我剛好當過幾次reviewer。 我把Scientific Reports要求reviewer審稿的原則po在下面，這樣大家在知道他們家重視 的重點是什麼之後，對於投稿可能會有些幫助。Open access期刊通常比較不重視novelty ，下面第二段有寫。另外，Open access期刊通常都要收費，而且很貴。我的建議是，對 於剛入行的學者或學生，在經費沒問題的前提下Scientific Reports是很好的入門，因為 NPG比起其他出版社的open access期刊，要求還是高很多，除了novelty外整體還是在水 準之上。但是長遠來看，磨練研究的novelty還是躲不掉的苦工，最好不要對open access 的高接受率上癮。我認識的人裡面已經開始有廣用open access湊SCI篇數的傾向，不是好 現象。 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? --

※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 114.27.47.221 ※ 文章網址: http://webptt.com/m.aspx?n=bbs/PhD/M.1420381867.A.3D7.html