「第M講」一篇SCI論文的審稿過程

你的SCI論文是怎樣被評審的？

作者 / 李嘉暉

審校 / 李嘉暉

日期 / 2017年4月11日

「專欄目錄」「目錄」SCI，從入門到精通

「上期回顧」「第N講」一篇SCI論文的投稿過程（一）

「下期預告」「番外篇」學術科普網站合集（一）

本專欄作品受著作權法保護，禁止轉載。我已委託「維權騎士」（http://rightknights.com）為我的文章進行維權行動。

如今，許多高校都將發表SCI論文作為碩士、博士生的畢業要求之一，許多苦逼的研（ban）究（zhuan）生（gong），為了達到畢業要求，不辭辛勞。他們辛辛苦苦地做完實驗，一遍又一遍地修改文章。好不容易完成了投稿，總是擔心文章不能及時接收，耽誤自己的畢業。因而一遍又一遍的刷新著郵箱與投稿系統，等待那封莊嚴而神聖的郵件到來：「It is a pleasure to accept your manuscript entitled......」。然後大功告成，順利畢業。若是還需回複審稿人那又臭又長的審稿意見，應對編輯一輪又一輪的修改要求，估計早已累覺不愛。

那麼，你投稿到SCI期刊的論文究竟經歷怎樣的過程呢？你的論文又是如何被審稿人評閱的呢？今天，我將從審稿人的角度，帶你全方位領略一篇SCI論文投稿後被評審的全部過程，揭開審稿系統背後神秘的面紗。

首先，先介紹論文投稿後的狀態變化：

New Submission→Initial Check→With Editor→Under Review→Required Review Completed→Decision in Process→Minor Revision / Major Revision / Reject and Resubmit / Reject / Accept。

1. 投稿完畢（New Submission）。

投稿通過後，文章將被分配一個稿件號（Manuscript Number），從中可一窺投稿的數量（投BBRC的人可真不少）。

2. 格式審查 （Initial Check）。（時長：1天~2周）

現在不少期刊都增加了格式審查這一環節，通常由助理編輯（Editor Assistant）完成，負責檢查文章的格式是否符合期刊的投稿指南（Guide for Authors）。格式審查的速度通常由稿件數量決定（常規為1~2天，Scientific Reports通常需要1~2周時間）。我在上一篇文章「第N講」一篇SCI論文的投稿過程（一）中，節選了JACS和Nature的Guide for Authors進行解讀。

如果不符合格式審查的要求，文章將被退回（Submissions Sent Back to Author），編輯部會發來要求修改的郵件：

Dear Prof. X,

In checking your manuscript submitted to Journal of A and B, it has come to our attention that the following must be addressed before we can process your submission:

-- The volume number in the references must be in bold. Please ensure all journal names are abbreviated and italicised in the references section.

Please make the correction(s) as specified above and resubmit your paper by following the "Continue Halted Submission" link.

Sincerely,

Manuscript Administration

Journal of A and B

部分期刊要求作者針對格式審查寫回複信（Response to Technical Check Results），寫法和審稿意見回複信（Point-by-Point Response to Reviewers Comments）類似，以後會分享。

3. 編輯初審 （With Editor）。（時長：1天~1月）

With Editor是稿件第一個命運攸關的時刻。副主編（Associate Editor）會對文章進行初步審查，判斷文章主題是否符合期刊主旨（Scope）、文章是否達到期刊水準等。

3.1 對於高水平期刊，大部分的稿件將直接被編輯退回，不會送到審稿人手中。

Nature has space to publish only 8% or so of the 200 papers submitted each week, hence its selection criteria are rigorous. Many submissions are declined without being sent for review.

3.2 小部分特別優秀的稿件，編輯擁有直接接收（Accept）、或要求作者進行修改（Revision）的權利，不再送至審稿人處進行審閱。

我曾經有幸得到過編輯的青睞，在無需外審的情況下直接接收（小修）。

Ms. Ref. No.: JMAD-D-15-00959

Title:

Materials and Design

Dear Mr. Jiahui Li,

I am pleased to inform you that your paper "Title" has been accepted for publication in Materials and Design.

Below are comments from the editor.

"This is a very interesting paper and it is pleasing to see what the authors have accomplished with their students. In many respects the musical instrument industry needs more papers like this.」 However, the conclusion has to be presented in the manuscript so that a "wholesome story can be told".

...

Thank you for submitting your work to Materials and Design.

Yours sincerely,

Associate Editor

Materials and Design

3.3 編輯認為稿件基本符合期刊的水準，送至審稿人處審閱。

Dear Mr. Li,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript entitled "Title" to Scientific Reports. I am pleased to inform you that, after an initial assessment, your manuscript will be peer reviewed. We are now in the process of contacting referees.

We will contact you after we have received our referees comments.

Best regards,

Manuscript Administration

Scientific Reports

編輯可能會選用作者推薦的審稿人，也會從期刊的常用審稿人、參考文獻的作者、同行的領軍者中自行選擇合適的人選，並用郵件發送審稿邀請：

Dear Mr. Li,

I am writing to you as to an expert in the topic related to the paper listed below. Let me know if you would like to be a referee for the manuscript entitled "Title" by Dr. Z (corresponding author) and could help us in determining whether this manuscript is appropriate for publication in Journal of A and B.

Abstract:

We would appreciate your response to this invitation within 14 days. Should you accept this invitation, you will find this manuscript in your "Pending Assignments" menu.

I am aware that the review requires time and effort but it would be very helpful if you could return your comments in 50 days. Please contact us via email should you be unable to meet this goal.

We would like to thank you in advance for feedback.

Best regards,

Managing Editor

Journal of A and B

With Editor的時間取決於同時段的投稿數量、編輯邀請的審稿人數量、審稿人接受（Accept）或拒絕（Decline）審稿邀請後回復的時間，編輯一般會給出時限（本次為14天，通常不超過1個月）。審稿人如果逾期未回復，編輯會發郵件催促1~2次。

如果多位審稿人拒絕編輯的審稿要求，編輯將重新尋找合適的審稿人，With Editor的時間將進一步延長，甚至會因為文章受眾群體太小，找不到審稿人，直接被拒稿（Reject）。

編輯發送給審稿人的郵件中將只會包含摘要，所以請務必把摘要寫好！

4. 同行評議（Under Review）。（時長：1周~6月）

4.1 登錄投稿系統。

所有審稿人都同意進行審稿後，文章將進入Under Review狀態。審稿人通過郵件中的賬戶、密碼，以Reviewer的身份登錄投稿系統，開始審稿。系統會提示審稿截止時間（Days Until Review Due），本次為50天。

主頁面中可以看到正在進行的審稿數量為1篇，Pending Assignments（1）。

4.2 點擊Reviewer Instructions，查看審稿須知。

As a reviewer, you are performing animportant professional service for the international scientific community byupholding scientific standards and, at the same time, protecting the authors』 interestin making their achievements generally known.

Please, do not distribute copies of themanuscript or use results contained in without authors』 permission. However,please feel free to show it to knowledgeable colleagues and to consult themabout the review. Suggestions for alternative referees are helpful to theeditors and would be appreciated.

Below, you will find some questions wewould like to ask you to consider in preparing your report. If you wish to makeadditional remarks that would be inappropriate for forwarding to the authors,please, mark them clearly in your report. Using our online system you caneither paste your report in the text window, or include it as a file.

4.3 文章評分（Manuscript Rating）。

不同的SCI期刊，對文章的評分要求不同。試舉幾例：

期刊1：

• Does the work presented in the papercontain enough new material to warrant publication?
• Is the paper interesting for thespecialists in the field?
• Do the results improve the currentknowledge?
• Is the paper scientifically sound and notmisleading?
• Is the paper suitable for the journal interms of the scope and quality of the paper?
• Is the article correct and of highscientific quality?
• Is the article organized in a clear andeasy to understand manner?
• Are there major language improvementsneeded?
• Is the language adequate?
• Are the literature citations appropriateand adequate?
• Are the descriptions of methods sufficientfor understanding of the presented work?

期刊2:

• Please rate on a scale of 1-3 whether the Graphical Abstract is a meaningful and an accurate representation of the article.
• Please rate on a scale of 1-3 whether the Highlights are a meaningful and accurate representation of the article.

To what extent does the article meet this criterion? (0-4)

• The subject addressed in this article is worthy of investigation.
• The information presented was new.
• The conclusions were supported by the data.

Is there a financial or other conflict of interest between your work and that of the authors?

期刊3：

When assessing the work, please consider the following points:

• Is the question posed by the authors new and well defined?
• Are the methods appropriate and well described, and are sufficient details provided to replicate the work?

• Are the data sound and well controlled?

• Does the manuscript adhere to the relevant standards for reporting and data deposition?

• Are the discussion and conclusions well balanced and adequately supported by the data?

• Do the title and abstract accurately convey what has been found?

• Is the writing acceptable?

總結一下，編輯主要關心：

（1）文章內容是否具有足夠的創新性？

（2）文章主題是否符合期刊的受眾讀者？

（3）文章方法學是否合理，數據處理是否充分？

（4）文章的標題、摘要、引言、結論是否清晰明確？

（5）文獻綜述、參考文獻引用是否充足？

（6）行文語言是否流暢可讀？

以此觀之，除了文章的核心部分——創新性以外，期刊對文章的寫作要求也很高。很多文章即使創新性並不突出，但只要數據處理得好，文章寫得好，照樣有機會發表。所以寫文章是一門大學問。尤其在母語非英語的國家，寫一篇流暢可讀的文章，就至少能令作者有更多的機會進入一輪或多輪評審，而不是令審稿人「難以下咽」，直接拒稿。

4.4 審稿意見（Comments）。

文章的評分完成後，審稿人需要寫一封完整的審稿意見。通常包含對文章內容的簡要概括，對文章創新點的評價，對文章不足之處的指正，並給出建議編輯對此文處理意見。

審稿人對文章的處理意見分為以下五類（以Nature的Editorial Process為例）：

• 接收（Accept）：The paper is accepted for publication without any further changesrequired from the authors.
• 小修（Minor Revision）: The paper is accepted for publication in principle once the authorshave made some revisions in response to the referees』 reports.
• 大修（Major Revision）: A final decision on publication is deferred, pending the authors』response to the referees』 comments.
• 重投（Reject and Resubmit）: The paper is rejected because the referees have raised considerabletechnical objections and/or the authors』 claim has not been adequatelyestablished. Under these circumstances, the editor』s letter will stateexplicitly whether or not a resubmitted version would be considered.
• 拒稿（Reject）:The paper is rejected with no offer to reconsider a resubmittedversion.

遞交審稿意見的同時，系統會詢問審稿人，是否願意繼續審閱這篇論文的修改稿。

5. 審稿完畢（Required Review Completed）。（時長：1~5天）

編輯通常會把稿件送到3~5個審稿人處，一般當指定數量（2~3）個審稿人回復了審稿意見後，進入Required Review Completed的狀態。這個狀態的時間很短，通常為1~5天左右。如果多位審稿人答應審稿，但卻超過時限未能及時返回意見，致使無法達到編輯可作抉擇的最低審稿人數，則編輯會重新邀請審稿人，文章的審稿時間將會進一步延長。建議Under Review超過4個月以上，可向編輯詢問稿件狀態如何，以免耽誤修改或改投。

6. 編輯終審（Editor Decision）。

Required Review Completed後，編輯會根據全體審稿人的意見，做出最終裁決。如果審稿人意見相同，或分歧不大，編輯會依照審稿人的意見做決定。如果分歧較大，編輯會重新邀請新的審稿人進行仲裁，稿件狀態將變回Under Review。

一般來說，文章被接收，將會直接進入校稿（Proof）狀態，等待出版。

文章為小修，將不會在送至審稿人處進行第二輪審閱，編輯會直接做決定。部分期刊將小修和大修合併為修改（Revision），但可從編輯來信中的語氣判斷編輯對此文的認可程度。

文章為大修，一般會送至原有審稿人處進行第二輪審閱（若繼續答應審稿）。若作者主動提出反對（Oppose），或編輯認為某位審稿人的審稿意見不專業，或太片面，也會選擇邀請新的審稿人進行第二輪審閱，可能會繼續大修 / 小修（進入第三輪審稿），接收或拒稿。

文章為拒稿重投，表示編輯認為審稿人提出了大量關鍵性的問題（通常是針對創新性或方法學提出的質疑），編輯選擇拒稿，但歡迎重新投稿（Resubmission），但重投後的稿件也會更嚴格的審核，決定是否送至審稿人處進行第二輪審閱，或是直接拒稿。

文章為拒稿，此次投稿失敗。作者需另尋其他期刊投稿，或者通過出版社的論文轉投系統（Manuscript Transfer），一鍵投稿至本出版社的其他期刊（Nature→Nature Chem.→Nat. Commun.→Sci. Rep.; J. Am. Chem. Soc.→J. Org. Chem.→ACS Appl. Mater. Inter.→ACS Chem. Biol.; Adv. Mater. / Angew Chem. Int. Ed.→Adv. Funct. Mater.→ChemSusChem; Chem. Sci.→Chem Commun.→RSC Adv.）。

值得注意的是，編輯才是擁有最終裁決權的人。如果審稿人都傾向於拒稿，但編輯認為文章仍有可取之處，可能會給予一次大修或拒稿重投的機會。若審稿人都傾向於接收，但編輯認為文章仍有缺陷之處，可能會要求一次小修或大修。若審稿人一部分傾向於接收，另一部分傾向於拒稿，編輯可能會根據仲裁人的意見決定，也可能會根據自己的判斷，傾向於接收但要求作者必須認真對待反對者的意見。

我曾有一篇文章，第一輪的審稿意見為一正一略負（Reviewer 1 and 3），編輯給予了修改的意見。第二輪審稿時，Reviewer 4的意見為「In contrary to Reviewer 2s report, here reviewer would very much like this submission to appear on Journal」，由此可見，編輯認為2號審稿人的意見不充分，因此在第一輪審稿時，就沒有將他的審稿意見發送給我，第二輪審稿自然也並未再次邀請他審稿。

部分期刊，如Nature，提供申訴（Appeal）的選擇。作者若認為審稿人的意見出現嚴重的原則性錯誤，可向編輯提交申訴書，但一般很難成功。

Authors who feel that they have strong grounds for appealing a decision may contact the journal to request the opening of an appeal, after which they may upload a cogently argued rebuttal letter that addresses the referees』 and/or editor』s comments in a point-by-point manner. Decisions are reversed on appeal only if the editors are convinced that the original decision was made in error or critical new information or data has been added.

7. 作者修改（Revision）。

除了直接接收和拒稿以外，作者都需根據審稿人的意見，撰寫回複信（Point-by-Point Response to Reviewers Comments），並附上修改後的文章，通過投稿系統以修改稿的形式投出，等待編輯的進一步裁決。回複信的寫法將在以後的文章進行分享。

以上。

本專欄作品受著作權法保護，禁止轉載。

歡迎在評論區點評，留言或提問，謝謝！

「回顧上期」「第N講」一篇SCI論文的投稿過程（一）

「閱讀下期」「番外篇」學術科普網站合集（一）

「瀏覽目錄」「目錄」SCI，從入門到精通

推薦閱讀：