P*********y
发帖数: 41 | 1 最近Review一篇文章，理由充分地把它给据了。他们现在投到另一个杂志，又找到我
review，我是找个借口拒绝review，还是告诉Editor我以前review并据过这篇文章？ |
j******l
发帖数: 1068 | 2 Of course 找个借口拒绝review.
You need to give that paper a chance.
【在 P*********y 的大作中提到】
: 最近Review一篇文章，理由充分地把它给据了。他们现在投到另一个杂志，又找到我
: review，我是找个借口拒绝review，还是告诉Editor我以前review并据过这篇文章？
|
d***0
发帖数: 117 | 3 It's very common one manuscript was rejected by one journal (IF=10) and
accepted by other journal (IF=1). |
P*********y
发帖数: 41 | 4 Forgot to mention that IFs of the two journals are close (0.3 difference).
Problem is that their method is not theoretically correct (this is a
bioinformatics ms). My opinion is that this ms should not be published in
any journal.
【在 d***0 的大作中提到】
: It's very common one manuscript was rejected by one journal (IF=10) and
: accepted by other journal (IF=1).
|
d**c
发帖数: 16 | 5 oh, come on. Even the wrong method can still contribute to the field from
alternative aspect. If it is not a high-impact journal, why not mention your
concerns with major revision, rather than direct reject.
【在 P*********y 的大作中提到】
: Forgot to mention that IFs of the two journals are close (0.3 difference).
: Problem is that their method is not theoretically correct (this is a
: bioinformatics ms). My opinion is that this ms should not be published in
: any journal.
|
f**l
发帖数: 2041 | 6 我曾经拒过一篇文章三次. 不同的journal, 我认为那根本就是概念错误.
有的时候有些跨学科的文章, 会违背在另外一个领域认为很基本的常识.
为了验证, 我还专门构造了一个反例给作者. 但是作者不死心, 换了杂志
继续来. 我只好接着拒. 不知道他有没有换第四家杂志发.
【在 P*********y 的大作中提到】
: Forgot to mention that IFs of the two journals are close (0.3 difference).
: Problem is that their method is not theoretically correct (this is a
: bioinformatics ms). My opinion is that this ms should not be published in
: any journal.
|
v******d
发帖数: 1322 | 7 既然是原则性错误，就直接把原来的review发给editor，建议editor直接锯掉，不要浪
费别的reviewer的时间
【在 P*********y 的大作中提到】
: 最近Review一篇文章，理由充分地把它给据了。他们现在投到另一个杂志，又找到我
: review，我是找个借口拒绝review，还是告诉Editor我以前review并据过这篇文章？
|
d***0
发帖数: 117 | 8 Then just point out the problem and reject it again, again, and again .....
you don't need to tell the editor that you rejected it before.
【在 P*********y 的大作中提到】
: Forgot to mention that IFs of the two journals are close (0.3 difference).
: Problem is that their method is not theoretically correct (this is a
: bioinformatics ms). My opinion is that this ms should not be published in
: any journal.
|
e**p
发帖数: 4259 | 9 yes, just give the author another chance. If they had fetal error even in
methodology, other reviewers will see it. |
i**w
发帖数: 422 | 10 If the paper has a fatal error, the LZ definitely should reject it.
If it is just a matter of contribution and IF, the LZ can give it a chance.
My 2 cents.
【在 e**p 的大作中提到】
: yes, just give the author another chance. If they had fetal error even in
: methodology, other reviewers will see it.
|
|
|
e**p
发帖数: 4259 | 11 I mean "if the paper has fatal error", maybe there is no error in
methodology. It is possible that LZ may misunderstand their work. It does not hurt anybody if just give them a chance.
Let other reviewers have a chance to judge it.
【在 i**w 的大作中提到】
: If the paper has a fatal error, the LZ definitely should reject it.
: If it is just a matter of contribution and IF, the LZ can give it a chance.
: My 2 cents.
|
v******d
发帖数: 1322 | 12 the authors should have already explained it in their responses, it is very
unlikely that LZ misunderstand it. If u avoid it that means u r unsure of
your concern, then you shouldn't reject it in the first place. "u" refers to
lz
not hurt anybody if just give them a chance.
【在 e**p 的大作中提到】
: I mean "if the paper has fatal error", maybe there is no error in
: methodology. It is possible that LZ may misunderstand their work. It does not hurt anybody if just give them a chance.
: Let other reviewers have a chance to judge it.
|
e**p
发帖数: 4259 | 13 if the paper was rejected by the journal, the authors have no chance to
explain in the responses.
very
to
【在 v******d 的大作中提到】
: the authors should have already explained it in their responses, it is very
: unlikely that LZ misunderstand it. If u avoid it that means u r unsure of
: your concern, then you shouldn't reject it in the first place. "u" refers to
: lz
:
: not hurt anybody if just give them a chance.
|
i**w
发帖数: 422 | 14 I am assuming other reviewers shared the samiliar concern as LZ, which led
to the rejection of the paper.
not hurt anybody if just give them a chance.
【在 e**p 的大作中提到】
: I mean "if the paper has fatal error", maybe there is no error in
: methodology. It is possible that LZ may misunderstand their work. It does not hurt anybody if just give them a chance.
: Let other reviewers have a chance to judge it.
|
v******d
发帖数: 1322 | 15 given that lz is so sure it is wrong, why can't he reject it again? If he
is unsure, then shouldn't he ask for author response?
【在 e**p 的大作中提到】
: if the paper was rejected by the journal, the authors have no chance to
: explain in the responses.
:
: very
: to
|
P*********y
发帖数: 41 | 16 The editor already gave them a chance to explain but in the response letter
they admitted the problems which they can't fix. Then the ms get rejected
after major revision.
【在 e**p 的大作中提到】
: if the paper was rejected by the journal, the authors have no chance to
: explain in the responses.
:
: very
: to
|
P*********y
发帖数: 41 | 17 I don't want to provide an official review this time because I am afraid
that if I do so my anonymity will be lost due to the small research field.
【在 v******d 的大作中提到】
: given that lz is so sure it is wrong, why can't he reject it again? If he
: is unsure, then shouldn't he ask for author response?
|
v******d
发帖数: 1322 | 18 what is the point of not reviewing it?
letter
【在 P*********y 的大作中提到】
: The editor already gave them a chance to explain but in the response letter
: they admitted the problems which they can't fix. Then the ms get rejected
: after major revision.
|
P*********y
发帖数: 41 | 19 Even trash can be recycled :-)
your
【在 d**c 的大作中提到】
: oh, come on. Even the wrong method can still contribute to the field from
: alternative aspect. If it is not a high-impact journal, why not mention your
: concerns with major revision, rather than direct reject.
|
P*********y
发帖数: 41 | 20 You are so fast, Little Wind :-)
Please check #17.
【在 v******d 的大作中提到】
: what is the point of not reviewing it?
:
: letter
|
|
|
v******d
发帖数: 1322 | 21 i don't use www, can't see which one is #17
【在 P*********y 的大作中提到】
: You are so fast, Little Wind :-)
: Please check #17.
|
b***d
发帖数: 102 | 22 都是大牛，弱问如何有机会给杂志审稿，俺没发过好文章 |
s******y
发帖数: 165 | 23 Then why don't you let the editor know all of the situation and give the
editor your previous review, then the editor should be able to take your
previous review into account even if he/she doesn't use you as a formal
reviewer.
【在 P*********y 的大作中提到】
: I don't want to provide an official review this time because I am afraid
: that if I do so my anonymity will be lost due to the small research field.
|
