分享两篇SCI论文被接收心得!
做为研究生,不可否认SCI论文在大家心目的地位,三年的硕士,或者再三年的博士,我们一直开为之奋斗着,痛苦着,快乐着．而一些诸如submit,under review,reject,minor revision or maj or revision的字眼则时刻牵动着我们那脆弱而且不自信的心．当稿件投出以后，想必你也像我一样每天不停的刷新邮件，而最害怕的莫过于看到"I regret to have to inform you tha t......."这样的消息了．
回想自己的点滴，以及最近小小的成功，我觉得我有必要，也有义务向各位朋友们分享．硕博连读的第三年，具体说来是2008年初，我的两篇ＳＣＩ论文先后被接收了，下面我想回忆一下两篇论文投稿以及被接收的过程．
第一篇：
杂志：Talanta（２.８分）
Received at Editorial Office: 18-SEP-2007
Article revised: 15-JAN-2008
Article accepted for publication: 18-JAN-2008
专业：生物分析化学类
说起这篇文章，可是让我痛苦了一整年，实验很多，做的很辛苦，数据相对繁多，由于这是我第一篇文章，写作方面也是摸石头过河，逐句的模仿．为了写这篇文章，我仔细研读了该领域的大约１００篇文献，对别人写的好的句子，类似的句子都做了标记，在写作的过程中想起要表达什么意思的时候马上随时翻阅，这样下来，每天写一小段，有时候甚至每天就写那么几小句，大约一个月后，我发现一篇包含abstract,intrduction,experiment,results and discussion初稿居然完成了．
初稿完成后，放了大约个把星期不管，接着做其他的实验，待一个星期过后再来研读，发现文章写的错误百出，句子连贯性，逻辑性，以及整篇文章的通读性都很差，于是又是仔细研读别人的论文，学习再学习，每天读一点，回头看看自己的文章，再改一点，又是将近个把月，一篇有模有样的初稿出现了，这时候我迫不极待的想把文章投出去了，于是放了两三天后，写了个c over letter,花了一晚上时间（想必应该也有人花一整个晚上在Elsevier投稿系统上的痛苦经历吧），把稿件投向了一个本领域的分析杂志．稿件投出去大概半个月，收到了主编的信，主编认为我能回答他的问题，以及按他的意见修改就可能出版．可能是经验欠缺，我在收到信后的一个星期，就把修改稿返回了过去，对其中的提到的不足和问题我只是在文章中引用了其他一些文献和做了自己的说明，显然，这样的举动在主编和认为是很不认真的，过了一个月后，收到了Fi nal Decision，那就是拒绝了．
Dear ***,
> On behalf of the editor handling your manuscript, I am writing to you in refer ence to your manuscript entitled:************
I regret to have to inform you that your manuscript is not suitable for publicatio n in ***. This decision has been reached in light of the comments made by the referees. The detailed remarks are appended below.
Reviewers' comments:
> Reviewer 1: "*************" seemed to contain sufficient material for publicatio n purpose. However, unfortunately, the authors did not address sufficiently what are the main advantages of this particular detection technique over previously r eported ones.
*************
Overall, the English language proved to be insufficient for publication purpose a nd needs to be revised. Specific care should be taken with regards to prepositio ns since it can alter the meaning of a statement
Editor:
> Unfortunately, the reviewer has recommended against publication of this work in ***. In examining the reviewer's specific comments, I note that some of the comments mirror those that I made when the manuscript was initially submitted. In particular, the reviewer indicates that the authors have still not made a convi ncing case for the advantages of the proposed method over earlier techniques. Given these considerations, I must regrettably recommend rejection of this manu script.
就因为没有用心写出文章的优点来，就这样被毙掉了，感到非常痛心，教训深刻！
接下来，我又挑选了一个杂志，我自认为应该很容易中，因为我在那个杂志上看到有类似的文章，且我自认为内容还不如我的好．可是两本杂志属于不同的出版集团，引用文献的格式完全不同，又痛苦的花了一个晚上把文献格式改了过来，这种工作就和做针线活差不多，睁着眼睛在看，你不能急，一急就郁闷的不得了．
于是乎，又是一翻上传的痛苦经历，可是，不到两天，不幸又降临了，居然认为我的稿件不适合该杂志，说白了，就是不想要嘛．
Dear Dr***,
I am writing to you on behalf of Editor ****.
We regret to inform you that **** is unable to accept your manuscript *******, Manuscript No. ABC-00938-2007 for publication in *****.
In view of the limited number of pages available to us each year to cover the en tire field of analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, its instrumental advances and its wide range of applications, we can only publish a selection of the papers sub mitted to our journal.
We are sorry not to be able to send you better news.
这个时候，什么情绪都有了，有时候想，是不是自己的工作还没有够的上档次？是不是文章真的写的很差，因为还没有接收过ＳＣＩ论文，所以这个时候的自信心真的是非常的差，后来干脆把文章晾在了一边．
心情平静下来了又想，花了这么多心思做的东西，是不可能放弃的，况且当初在选这个题目的时候就认为这个工作还是有一定意思和意义的．
于是，我根据之前审稿人的意思，又补充了一些实验，在写作上也丰富了一些．过了一个多月，我又开始了新的冲击．
这一次，显然，努力得到回报了．
Dear professor ***,
> We have received expert review of your manuscript. You will see that revision of your manuscript is advised, and suggestions are offered for improving the ma nuscript and it's impact. If you are prepared to undertake the work required, I w ould be pleased to consider the paper for publication in Talanta.
> For your guidance, reviewers' comments are appended below.
Reviewers' comments:
> Overall, this is a paper that deserves to be published, but requires revision.(有这一句就够了，当时心情超好，无法形容）
象下面这样的意见，也是非常中肯的，感谢审稿人，感谢编辑，感谢ＣＣＴＶ！
General comments:
> The English used in this paper requires major revision. I do not underestimate the challenge of writing a scientific paper in a language that is not the native t ongue. However, the science is currently being complicated by the grammar of t he paper. In particular, single/plural conflicts and changes of (and inappropriate use of) tenses (see especially section 2.5 where the middle third of the text swit ches to the present tense). Improving the paper in this way would ensure that t he reader can focus upon the science
1. The discussions throughout the manuscript is superficial, thus thorough and c omprehensive discussions are required in the section of "Results and Discussion". >
2. Conclusion should not be a duplication of the Abstract.
当然，也提出了其他的不少意见，这次我可是对待的相当认真，其中有一条审稿意见我不太明白，为此我在某专业论文上发贴和别人讨论了一个多星期．
修改了个把月，上传，第三天，刷新邮件，收到来信如下：
Dear professor ***,
> I am pleased to confirm that your paper "******" has been accepted for public ation in Talanta.
> With kind regards,
接下来讲讲我的第二篇
Journal title: Electrochemistry Communications（3.48分）
Received at Editorial Office: 23-DEC-2007
Article revised: 29-JAN-2008
Article accepted for publication: 30-JAN-2008
实际上，在第一篇文章的辗转经历中，第二篇文章的实验已经在进行并且写作了，有了第一次的经历，第二篇文章在写作上显然轻松了许多，考虑到还有不多久快要放寒假，因此我在考虑把稿件要么投一个审稿周期长点的杂志，那么在假期中就不需要为稿件操心了，要么就投一个快点的杂志，干脆在放假前就搞定，最后经过权衡，我选择了后者．
2007年12月18日晚，稿件上传，１９日，收到回信，还以为是拒了，吓一跳，原来是文章长了，要缩短．
> Electrochemistry Communications
> Dear professor ***,
> This paper is too long for Electrochemistry Communications which aims to pu blish short, urgent communications (see Guide for Authors). Please either submit it elsewhere as a full paper or shorten it to Communication Length and resubm it.
> For Communication Length please observe the following formula:
> Total number of words + 200 x (No of figures + No of tables) < 3000.
> Your paper currently contains 2929 words and 4 figures. According to the for mula above, this is the equivalent of 3729 words, which is too long for this jour nal.
> Yours sincerely,
> R. Compton
> Editor in Chief
> Electrochemistry Communications
>
> Electrochemistry Communications
> Physical and Theoretical Chemistry Laboratory
> South Parks Road
> Oxford
> OX1 3QZ
> UK
按照要求，仔仔细细的缩短，又顺便修改润色了一翻，花了一个星期，在西方的圣诞节的前一天，我把稿件发了出去，当时西方正在放假，可想而知，稿件躺在里面毫无动静，大约到了元月８日，我觉得也应该放假归来了吧，可怎么还没有给我的稿件那怕是分配一个稿件号呢？因为这个杂志向来速度是很快的，通常一个月内完成从稿件接受到接收的过程．
于是，我写了封信给编辑：
Dear professor R. Compton
We have shorten our manuscript entitled "*********" to communication length an d resubmitted it to Electrochemistry Communications on 23 December 2007, but have not, as yet, receive the assigned manuscript number. We fear that the ma nuscript may have been lost and should be grateful if you would let us know w hether or not you have received it. If not, we will send our manuscript again. Th ank you in advance for your help.
Best regards,
第二天，回复了，并且马上分配了稿件号，果然上班了，可能是假期归来，身心疲惫吧．做编辑也不容易．
这样半个多月的某天早晨，已经放假了，可是大雪封路，回不了家啊，干脆在床上睡懒觉，师姐
的一个电话把我叫醒了，说让我查查邮件，文章要修改，１０天之内完成．
打开电脑，一个喜庆的邮件展现在我面前．
> Electrochemistry Communications
> Dear professor ***,
> We will be pleased to accept your manuscript after revision in the light of the enclosed referee's comments provided they can be attended to within 10 days. > Please submit a letter fully detailing your response to each point raised by th e referee along with your revised manuscript.
> Yours sincerely,
> R. Compton
> Editor in Chief
> Electrochemistry Communications
> Reviewers' comments:
> Reviewer #1:
> The authors of this manuscript reported a new application of electrochemilumi nescence (ECL) method in assaying telomerase activity. In this work, the magneti c beads-based TRAP-ECL assay was found to be a rapid and very sensitive (c.a. 100 fold increase in sensitivity) method to detect telomerase activity in tumor ce lls, as compared with the conventional TRAP method. This is an important work for the developed novel TRAP-ECL assay may become a first line assay for clinic al diagnosis and prognosis of cancer. Additionally, the paper was organized and presented well, and literatures were cited adequately. I recommend publication af ter minor revisions.
> Additional Comments:
> 1. A previous important work by Miao and Bard (Anal. Chem. 2004, 76, 5379 -5386) on magnetic beads-based ECL for DNA detection should be cited.
> 2. The words "?about 100 fold lower than that ?" (page 6, line2) should be ch anged to "?about 100 fold higher than that ?".
审稿人很认同我的工作，小小的修改，哪要１０天，个把小时就可以完成啊．就这样很快的完成了修改，第二天就接到了录用通知．心里那是相当的高兴的．
小小的总结：
１英文写作：两篇文章全部是由我一个人操刀写成，期间除了第一篇文章找一位老师改了几个句子，能够得到发表，说明最终英文的写作还是达标了．我的心得那就是模仿，没错，看别人怎么写，再套用，说实话，我们自己写的句子有几句能信的过呢？说到模仿，那也必须阅读过大量的文献，当你写作卡住的时候，你得想得到我在哪里看到过类似的句子才行．我前后看过的文献大概有２００篇左右．
２投稿杂志的选择：从我的经历来看，显然并不能以自己的主观想法为信条，有时候你认为好的，适合的杂志显然并不适合你，当然，这不一定是你的文章不适合某某杂志，更可信的理由是你的稿件恰好不适合某个审稿人的胃口．
３非常认真的对待审稿人的意见：尽可能详细的回答审稿人的问题，那怕是你自己认为都写的有点罗嗦了都没关系．审稿人是有感情的嘛．