编辑拒稿的几点理由

今天收到一份编辑写的审稿报告，大家讨论。我仔细看了看，虽然稿子的内容肯定是不一样的，但是编辑列举的审稿人提出的拒稿理由和以前公众号以及我今年的讲座中说的常见问题差不多，大家可以以后在写作中特别注意：

 需要凝练清晰的观点，而不能只是一个话题，这既体现在标题、摘要、开头和结尾的表述上，也体现在整个论文的行文中。

论述过多过杂，（不可兼论）

行文逻辑接不上，只有相关性，缺乏因果性

参考文献需要注意如何使用，不可过度依赖某一位学者

Reviewer A recommends Decline. Although the topic of cover design and translation is rich and interesting, Reviewer A notes that ‘the article does not make a clear argument, note any implications arising from the study, or demonstrate a contribution to scholarly understanding.’ In particular, Reviewer A points to the lack of focus in the piece. The article has been divided into 3 sections which has ‘resulted in a loss of rigour for the study as a whole’. Reviewer A also highlights an ‘over-reliance’ on the work of one scholar, Björkvall, and a more general failure to adequately situate the study within existing literature. Although this may sound disheartening to the author, Reviewer A has provided plenty of constructive guidance on how some of these issues might be remedied.  

Reviewer B recommends Revise and Resubmit. Like Reviewer A, they identify that the study has been fractured by too many sub-studies. ‘First, the focus of the article has to be sharpened on the translating of the visuals. An article should not discuss too many issues as it has been done in this article. The subchapter “Substudy 3: What covers do potential book buyers prefer?” leads the reader´s attention from the core of the research to a separate argument. If the subchapter in question is deleted, the article gains more coherence.’ Reviewer B also identified that ‘the research questions are not clearly explained, which makes it difficult to follow

转自“IRCL国际儿童文学学会会刊”微信公众号，本文仅作为学术交流分享，如有侵权，请联系本站删除！