学术界中，许多学者的职涯与论文发表数量息息相关。虽然一个人的发表多寡不代表他的聪颖程度或对于学术圈的实际贡献，然而许多研究单位、公司，甚至是非营利单位都使用发表文章多寡来比较候选人的好坏。但是一个研究计画可能需要耗费相当长的时间，而研究可以长达十几年。如果不加速研究进度的情况下，我们能如何增加论文发表列表的数量呢? 寻找其他发表的方法。 研究论文不是唯一一种被列为刊物的形式，你可以利用以下不同种类的文章来增加你发表数量。以下是各种不同的论文形式的介绍， 列表中提供每种写作的简短介绍、内容特色、是否由编辑征求、作者数量的统计、文献和字数，同时也准备了几个范例提供参考。 如果你写论文的时候，已经决定好要投哪个期刊的话，可以将该期刊最近的发表文章都看过一次来学习写作风格。除此之外，把期刊的作者须知(guide for authors)读过一次来确认编辑的确切要求。 文稿类别 详细内容 范文 Original Research Papers, including Clinical Cases Studies An article that discusses the details of recent original projects, including their data, results, and findings. This type of work includes references and figures. Word count: ~3,000 words Abstract: Yes References: many journals have a cap of 50-60 references Figures/Tables: ~5-8 Solicited: Usually unsolicited No.of Authors : ~5, though usually no limit Common genetic variation drives molecular heterogeneity in human iPSCs Statin and rottlerin small-molecule inhibitors restrict colon cancer progression and metastasis via MACC1 Water scarcity hotspots travel downstream due to human interventions in the 20th and 21st century The association between Western and Prudent dietary patterns and fasting blood glucose levels in type 2 diabetes and normal glucose metabolism in older Australian adults A Trial of Itraconazole or Amphotericin B for HIV-Associated Talaromycosis Hubble Law: Measure and Interpretation Brief Reports/ Case Reports A short manuscript that shares recent, validated findings by focusing on a single, novel concept such as a new approach to therapy or first-time reports of clinical cases. For example, a case report can discuss one to three patients or a single family . Word count: ~1,000-2,000 Abstract: Yes (shorter summary than original research paper abstract) References: 20 Figures/Tables: ~2-3 Solicited: Usually unsolicited No. of Authors : ~5 Buprenorphine for the Treatment of the Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome Case 13-2017 — A 41-Year-Old Man with Hearing Loss, Seizures, Weakness, and Cognitive Decline Review Articles A paper that summarizes recently published developments on a topic without adding new data. Typically, the explored studies must be no older than six to twelve months, and the authors use an objective approach to providing new insight on the topic. Word count: ~4,000 words Abstract: Yes References: 60-100 (usually contains more references than an original research article) Figures/Tables: ~5 Solicited: Generally solicited, but editors often accept unsolicited materials. Propose a topic to the editors before drafting. No. of Authors: 1-3 Chemical recycling of waste plastics for new materials production Diabetic Foot Ulcers and Their Recurrence Making the Case for Causal Dynamical Triangulations Systematic Reviews/ Meta-Analyses As a comprehensive review of a highly relevant topic, this type of manuscript frequently covers the history of the subject and a survey of approaches and strategies. This exhaustive literature review uses explicit methods and analyzes data from other studies. Statistical methods (meta-analysis) may be used to assign varying weights to the studies analyzed. In essence, a systematic review can be a cost-effective way to answer your research question without launching a new investigation. Word count: 5,000 Abstract: Yes PRISMA statement : Yes References: 100 Figures/Tables: ~5-8 Solicited: Unsolicited No. of Authors: 1-3 A Systematic Review of the Prevalence of Schizophrenia Impact of searching clinical trial registries in systematic reviews of pharmaceutical treatments: methodological systematic review and reanalysis of meta-analyses Vitamin C and the common cold For additional examples, see “ Systematic reviews. Some examples. “ Research Letters to the Editor Concise presentation of original, validated findings. Word count: up to ~700 words Abstract: No References: 6 Figures/Tables: 1-2 Solicited: Can be unsolicited No.of Authors : ~3-5 Slush-like polar structures in single-crystal relaxors Trial of Transplantation of HCV-Infected Kidneys into Uninfected Recipients Conservation: Pay countries to stop whaling Letters to the Editor regarding Recently Published Articles A short, reactionary letter regarding an article recently published by the journal. References are generally used to rebut, clarify or concur with claims presented in the published article, and the authors of the study being challenged can respond to the letter. The commenters sometimes use the letters to suggest other implications of a paper’s findings. Word count: ~300-500 words Abstract: No References: 5 Figures/Tables: 0-1 Solicited: Unsolicited No. of Authors: ~3 (some journals allow up to 10) Correspondence: Analytical flaws in a continental-scale forest soil microbial diversity study Case 8-2017: A Zimbabwean Man with a Severe Headache Junior scientists: Senior scientists as allies for equity Conservation: Pay countries to stop whaling Editorials: Opinions and Other Commentaries Various journals have different types of editorials. Clinical journals may focus on policies, ethical issues, and other current global issues that can affect clinical studies. These articles can also suggest new methods (e.g., new technologies and software) and policies that affect the practical aspects of being a researcher. Since these manuscripts aim to enrich the scientific knowledge by providing insights into matters that can affect the readership community, these articles are often solicited by editors. Word count: up to ~2,000 words Abstract: None References: 10 Figures/Tables: 0 Solicited: A journal may have several categories of editorial content, some of which are solicited, while others are not. Even when generally solicited, editors may accept proposals. No. of Authors: 1-3 Reassess dam building in the Amazon Empty rhetoric over data sharing slows science A Tale of Two Doctors — Structural Inequalities and the Culture of Medicine Perspectives/ Theoretical Papers Survey articles that assess theories, models, concepts and their controversies from a more subjective approach . Word count: a wide range of 1,000-7,000 Abstract: Yes References: 10-100 (depending on the article length) Figures/Tables: 1-2 Solicited: Unsolicited but proposals may be accepted No. of Authors: 3 Replication Catastrophe: When a Checkpoint Fails because of Exhaustion Damming the rivers of the Amazon basin The Waiting Game — Why Providers May Fail to Reduce Wait Times Specialized Articles regarding Protocols, Data Sharing and other Methodology-Related Content Research Elements is the trademarked name for Elsevier’s line of specialized short papers on sharing data, software code, developed materials and methods, and video articles. Other publishers carry similar articles, such as Nature ‘s “ Protocols .” This type of manuscript is short and usually peer-reviewed; however, some journals such as Protocols have more robust requirements, which are similar to those for full original research articles. The purpose of these documents is to promote the transparency, reproducibility, and collaboration and may or may not have open access. Word count: 3,000 Abstract: Yes References: depends on the length but can range from 1 to ~50. A minimum requirement may be 1: the study that demonstrates the method or protocol featured in this manuscript. Figures/Tables: 5 Solicited: Varies. Research Elements are unsolicited. Journals such as Protocols publish solicited works. Even if solicited, proposals may be accepted. No. of Authors: 3; one of the authors may need to be an author of the original research paper that applies the method discussed in the protocol paper (e.g., see Nature Protocols requirements ) Biological and chemical strategies for exploring inter- and intra-kingdom communication mediated via bacterial volatile signals mRNA quantification using single-molecule FISH in Drosophila embryos Generation of iPSC line HEL47.2 from healthy human adult fibroblasts Data on blueberry peroxidase kinetic characterization and stability towards thermal and high pressure processing Book Reviews As the category title suggests, this article type focuses on examining relevant books of interest to the journal’s readership. A manuscript may cover a single book or several based on a theme. Word count: 500-700 words Abstract: No References: No Figures/Tables: No Solicited: Solicited, but proposals may be accepted. Some editors have a specific list of books they may have slated for review, so you can ask them if you can participate in the book review process. No. of Authors: 1 Natural history: Thoreau’s debt to Darwin Astronomy: An all-American eclipse Conference Papers/ Conference Proceedings Although conference papers are based on research, they can focus solely on preliminary findings. Additionally, some fields such as computer science highly value conference paper publications. In addition, many universities and institutions may value journal publications more, but the academic community still finds merit in conference papers. In any case, publishing conference papers with organizations can help generate momentum for you as you continue your research. For example, some publications under the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Incorporated (IEEE) allow the conversion of conference papers into more substantial journal paper IEEE is also respected for its published conference proceedings. Length: 6 pages Abstract: Yes References 50 Figures/Tables: 5 Solicited: Unsolicited; submissions made in advance of the conference (~6 months minimum) of Authors: Varies but generally 3 May need to be present at conference to present your article A distributed cloud resource management framework for High-Performance Computing (HPC) applications Does Gamification Work? — A Literature Review of Empirical Studies on Gamification Estimation of coal consumption rate based on operating parameters For a list of IEEE conferences that accept publications, click here .
“Wiley在线讲堂”由Wiley旗下期刊专业的编辑团队、期刊出版经理与资深科研人员担任主讲，与您分享科研工作、论文写作、投稿出版和提升科研影响力等相关的各种问题。只需一台电脑/手机/平板，即可参与。所有课程完全免费开放！ 讲堂内容: Wiley国际出版集团出版的国际领先药理学期刊 British Journal of Pharmacology (简称BJP，IF: 7.73) 主编 Amrita Ahluwalia 教授 与期刊高级编辑 季勇教授 将担任主讲嘉宾，与中国科研群体分享在优质的国际药理学期刊发表论文的技巧与诀窍。 英国药理学会期刊BJP的发展历史与简介 分析BJP上关于天然产物相关研究的特点和论文接收率 解读关于天然产物研究的BJP指南（2020版） BJP编辑给中国作者的建议与互动交流 讲堂时间 2020年10月17日（周六），16:00-17:00 免费注册 扫描二维码免费注册 主讲人简介 Amrita Ahluwalia 教授 ■ British Journal of Pharmacology 主编，英国药理学会妇女药理学委员会首任主席 ■ 巴斯大学威廉哈维研究所担任所长及心血管药理学教授 Amrita Ahluwalia教授在英国巴斯大学获得药理学学士学位，并在威廉哈维研究所从事博士阶段的学习。上世纪90年代中期开始，她任职于英国圣乔治医学院，现在回到了母校巴斯大学威廉哈维研究所担任所长及心血管药理学教授，主要研究领域是针对心血管疾病找到改善心血管功能的治疗方法和策略。Amrita Ahluwalia是英国药理学会妇女药理学委员会的第一任主席，并创立了阿斯利康妇女药理学奖。 季勇 教授 ■ 南京医科大学副校长，江苏省心脑血管药物重点实验室主任 ■ British Journal of Pharmacology 亚州高级编辑（Asia Senior Editor）；Member of British Pharmacological Society（BPS） 季勇教授主要从事气体分子H2S和NO及其对蛋白质修饰在心血管系统中的作用及药物防治研究，主持国家重点基础研究发展计划项目、国家自然科学基金重点项目、国家自然科学基金重大研究计划重点项目、国家自然科学基金重点国际（地区）合作研究项目等课题，获教育部自然科学奖一等奖、江苏科学技术一等奖及中华医学科技奖二等奖。季教授还担任中国病理生理学会动脉粥样硬化专业委员会副主任委员；中国药理学会心血管药理专业委员会常委；国际动脉粥样硬化学会中国分会常务理事；中国病理生理学会心血管专业委员会委员；国际心脏研究会中国执委会委员；中国生物化学与分子生物学会脂质与脂蛋白专业委员会委员； British Journal of Pharmacology 亚州高级编辑；Member of British Pharmacological Society（BPS）等. 关于BJP: The British Journal of Pharmacology is th e leading international general pharmacology journal published by the British Pharmacological Society. It publishes high-quality original research and authoritative reviews, addresses topical pharmacology issues, and is committed to transparency and scientific rigor.BJP hosts the highly regarded Concise Guide to Pharmacology.
在对我们研究进行的叙述过程中，利用证据和实例来阐释说明是一个重要组成部分。的确，作者在论文中所提供的说明，表意明确的话，能够帮助作者强化研究结论的准确性；而不恰当的表达，反而可能让读者对文章的研究结论心生怀疑。因此， 使用适当且符合逻辑的句子引导读者理解论文的研究内容，是撰写论文时十分必要的能力。 1. 利用证据和实例的最佳时机 证据和实例为我们的说明打下一个稳定的基础。没有实例辅助的话，论文的结论缺乏可信度。不论是流水帐般的实例验证，还是无法提供任何材料或信息的来源，二者其实都一样糟糕的。因此，当你介绍实例时，需要确保适时睿智地挑选证据，并使用适当和清楚的句子来说明这个实例能够论证你的结论。当你在写作论文有以下几种需要时，你应该要介绍你的实例论证： 说明“非普遍知识”的内容时 ; 根据某个数据来引导结论、推论或说明涵义时; 需要澄清一个先前的叙述，使用范例说明能够更加清楚的时候; 需要找出某个类别的代表性范例; 想要区分概念时; 想要利用某个情况来强调某个特点时。 2. 相关句型使用建议 以下是根据功能的不同，我们列出了几个句型，虽然这个列表并不详尽，但至少能提供几个可以使用的短语类型。 2.1 目的 stating information that is not “common knowledge” 介绍性句型 As indicated/stated/discovered According to , 范文 As Smith indicated in a 2010 study . . . According to Marks and Peters . . . 2.2 目的 drawing conclusions, making inferences, or suggesting implications based on specific data 介绍性句型 suggests as evidenced/suggested/indicated by based on can be seen/observed when as seen in which is made apparent when is demonstrated by/through/when hinges on 范文 The strong negative correlation suggests that . . . As evidenced/suggested/indicated by their enlarged adrenal glands, patients with . . . Based on self-reported survey results . . . This phenomenon can be seen/observed when wind speeds exceed . . . As seen in the high recurrence rates of . . . The causal link between A and B, which is made apparent when B triggers . . . The efficacy of chocolate as a cure for unhappiness is demonstrated by survey results highlighted in . . . This conclusion hinges on . . . 2.3 目的 clarifying a prior statement 介绍性句型 for example for instance by way of illustration as an example to clarify to explain further namely to be specific that is, in other words, 范文 This occurrence is rare. For example , only one in twenty . . . It is unlikely that current population growth rates are sustainable. For instance , several major coastal cities are already suffering from . . . By way of illustration , less than 20% of new matriculants feel prepared for . . . As an example , when a country faces economic recession, polls indicate that over 80% of the population supports . . . To clarify , not all government-funded facilities provide . . . To explain further , large doses of Agent O can trigger . . . Millennials prefer flexible work conditions, namely the ability to work remotely. To be specific , bull markets can . . . That is, significant and sudden drops in temperature can . . . In other words, short bursts of high-intensity ultrasound can . . . 2.4 目的 identifying representative examples of a category 介绍性句型 for example/instance such as* e.g. one/another example like* excluding including an example being *NOTE: “such as” and “like” have two different uses. “Such as” introduces a specific example that is part of a category. “Like” suggests the listed items are similar to, but not included in, the topic discussed. 范文 Typhoons are considered acts of God, for example/instance . The island is home to many native carnivorous plants, such as Venus flytraps. The only known bioluminescent vertebrates are fish ( e.g. the anglerfish and lantern fish). One/another example of this exception is . . . I prefer outdoor sports like mountain climbing because they allow me to enjoy nature while exercising. All mammals, excluding humans, stop drinking milk at a young age. All stars, including our sun, . . . Hawks feast on rodents, an example being . . . 2.5 目的 distinguishing concepts 介绍性句型 in a similar case unlike the case of in the same way as a case in point in a typical situation in a normal scenario 范文 In a similar case , a male patient with arthritis . . . Unlike a single-blind study, a double-blind study reduces the risk of observer bias. Redundancy and wordiness can be reduced in the same way : through careful editing. As a case in point , let's look at the situation in which . . . In a typical situation , marsupials would . . . In a normal scenario , cortisol suppressant effects . . . 2.6 目的 emphasizing a point by highlighting a specific situation 介绍性句型 for example indeed in fact notably markedly as a case in point 范文 Nocturnal marsupials, for example , have . . . Indeed , since the World Health Organization declared an end to the Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo . . . Ice-free habitats around Antarctica, in fact , have . . . High carbon steel alloys, notably , undergo a transformation when . . . Markedly , the deserts irregular rainfall levels have . . . As a case in point , the last known male northern white rhinoceros . . . 我们不定期分享英文写作学习资源，想要了解更多，请至 Wordvice官网 博客查阅。
2017年的国际同行评议周（9/11-9/17）正进行的如火如荼， 业界各方探讨同行评审带来的不同契机和挑战，而对于科研作者而言， 正确的回复编辑以及同行审稿人的意见，对于科研文稿的命运，起着至关重要的作用， 藉此契机，我们一起和中国的科研作者讨论一下，在获得同行评议的意见之后，如何更好的和审稿人沟通。 目前的科研写作中的同行评议制度可谓既让人受益，又不免让人沮丧，而且有助于提高科研文稿质量的实质性建议，往往都深藏在篇幅较长措辞微妙的评论意见之中，这对于母语非英文的作者来说是一个很大的挑战，而且如果您发现审稿人显然没有通读您的文稿，或完全误解了某项结论，作者将作何解释和处理？ 很多时候作者可能非常想直接回答说该审稿人没有通读文章，然后并不作任何其他的解释。这种心情相信大家都有，如何正确的对待和处理才可以达到合理解释的同时恰当的表达自己的观点呢？ 首先，希望作者可以端正态度 要知道，同行评议中的审稿人是本着为促进科研界的探索和发现，诚心诚意的进行至关重要的审稿，因此我们有必要要向他们提供严谨并且全面的答复。审稿人从全新视角的为您的文稿提供评价，有时能在文稿到达更广泛的读者之前发现重大缺陷。最终是作者本人获得作品带来的荣誉，但审稿人对文稿的成文经过也起到了功不可没的作用。 您可以 无需认同审稿人的 每一条建议 ，但当您想拒绝一两条建议时，礼貌的答复会对您大有帮助。从长远角度来说，如何答复审稿人和编辑，也影响到您的手稿是否能获得满意的审阅决定。 您与审稿人进行礼貌和客观的讨论的同时也传达出您对学术的投入态度，以及希望让同行评议帮助您提高文稿质量的意愿。 好了，关键来了，那应该 怎样有礼有节的答复这些意见呢？ 以下英文范例是很多情况下作者可能会用到的表达，我们提供了更有礼貌的英文表述方式，以作参考。 另外很多时候，作者很可能已经审阅过其他作者的文章（-即使现在没有，在未来也很有可能成为审稿人），因此利用答复审稿人问题的机会，如果可以用您希望他人对待您的方式，将心比心。 以下仅为示例，请用自己的语言撰写具体意见。 • 您想要说 ：你之所以提出这个问题就是因为没理解我们写的东西 • 建议您说 ：我们有几处表述比预想的模糊，我们已对文本作出调整，使其更加清晰 明确。 （Several statements that we made were more ambiguous than intended, and we have adjusted to the text to be clearer.） • 您想要说 ：目前没人能回答那个问题。 • 建议您说 ：这个问题很合理，我们也正积极寻找答案。或这是个很合理的重要问题，我们也很想获知结果。但我们暂时回答不了这个问题。 （This is a valid question, and we are actively pursuing the answer in our lab. OR This is a valid and important question, and we are curious what the results would be. However, we are unaware of any studies that provide the answer.） • 您想要说 ：那种实验得花很久时间。 • 建议您说 ：建议中提及的实验十分有趣，能提供与……相关的其他信息（在这里引用评审人员的意见），但我们认为它超出了本研究的范围。 （The suggested experiment is interesting and would provide additional information about…, but we feel that it falls outside the scope of this study.） • 您想要说： 我们不是说已经证明了某项结论——那只是我们的假设！ • 建议您说 ： 我们同意这种解释目前只是推测，并且我们已对文本进行编辑，以说明本文结论仅由文中结果得出。 （We agree that this explanation is speculative at this time, and we have edited the text to state that our conclusion is only suggested by our results. ） 注：您需要改动文稿这部分的内容以便进一步强调您的描述仅为假设，即便您之前认为这很明显，但还是需要进行调整的，不能假设别人会如作者本人一样熟悉内容。 • 您想要说 ：你根本没看懂我们写的东西才有这样的疑问。 • 建议您说 ：我们并非想表明 ，因此我们已修改了文本，以具体说明 。 （We did not intend to indicate , and we have therefore altered the text to specify that . ） 注：如同前述，还是要对文稿那几处用词进行修改调整的。 • 您想要说 ：这个无关学术观点，不过是语言或者写作结构的问题罢了 • 建议您说 ：很抱歉出现这种语法失误，我们已根据您的建议更正了文本。如果可以提供语言编辑证书，更可以打消编辑对语言方面的疑虑，关注在研究发现的本身 （We apologize for this error, and we have corrected the text as suggested.） • 您想要说 ：我的英文写作能力比审稿人的好竟然挑剔我的语法？ • 建议您说 ：我们的文稿已被英文母语的人完成了对语言的修改润色，提高可读性。 同样的，如果可以提供语言编辑证书，更可以打消编辑对语言方面的疑虑，关注在研究发现的本身。 （Our manuscript has been reviewed by a native English speaker and revised to improve readability） Ben Mudrak, PhD Global Communications Manager PhD, Molecular Genetics and Microbiology Duke University 以上内容是节选自AJE公司供职的Ben Mudrak 博士的 博客文章“Responding to Reviewers: You Can't Always Say What You'd Like” Ben Mudrak 博士 毕业于杜克大学的生物学博士，研究领域Molecular Genetics and Microbiology
Wiley邀您 免费参与 论文写作与投稿在线讲座三十七期： European Journal of Immunology 论文发表及同行评审流程 主讲人：Karen Chu，European Journal of Immunology编辑 Karen Chu曾从事生物致病机制研究，在英属哥伦比亚大学获得理学学士和博士学位，并分别在伦敦卫生和热带医学学院和帝国理工学院获得T细胞免疫学博士后学位。2011年，Karen Chu以the European Journal of I mmunology （EJI ）期刊编辑的身份加入Wiley， 开始致力于把前沿研究带入科学界。 讲座内容： 《欧洲免疫学杂志》- European Journal of Immunology 是免疫学领域的国际高品质期刊，2013年影响因子4.518，处于SCI免疫学期刊的Q 1区。本次讲座旨在把这本期刊介绍给更多的中国作者，为其文章发表提供帮助。 1. EJI的研究范围及收录文章的标准 2. EJI公平透明的同行评审流程 同行评审的价值和类型 EJI对审稿人的要求及论文评审标准 EJI编辑的角色和作用 作者的选择 3. 作者如何答复审稿人的意见 4. 问答环节 时间：2015年1月8日，19:30-20:30 注册地址： http://www.diaochapai.com/survey1353490 相关免费文章推荐，欢迎阅读！ International Congress of Immunology Review Series 访问 Wiley在线课堂 及 Wiley中国博客 ，了解更多讲座信息！
尊敬的 Eddy 博士： 我是 PhD 学生，我最近读了一篇有趣的文章，是同专业领域的，但我觉得研究结果太难令人相信了。我想复制这个研究看看我是不是能得到同样的结果，但我的导师告诉我不要浪费时间复制别人的研究，因为这没办法发表的。您的看法呢？ 发表压力是很大的，对像你这样的年轻研究人员来说，研究生涯刚开始，发表高分期刊的压力尤其大，而这也一直是受到关注的新闻。 根据《纽约时报》（ The New York Times ）的 一篇报道 ，困扰着科学的一个大问题是期刊发表复制研究的低附加值。“复制”是科学的一个基本原则，一项新发现被接受的基本假设是其可复制性。科学本身是一个自我纠正的过程，研究人员都尝试在先前的研究上有所发展，原来的发现可能被证实或反驳，这本是科学进步的本质。但是，复制研究通常因为较缺少新意很难发表。根据《纽约时报》的新闻： Even when scientists rerun an experiment, and even when they find that the original result is flawed, they still may have trouble getting their paper published. The reason is surprisingly mundane: journal editors typically prefer to publish groundbreaking new research, not dutiful replications. （即便当科学家重新实验，或当他们发现原先的结果是有缺陷的，要发表仍然不易。其原因惊人的平常：期刊编辑喜欢发表开创性的研究，而不是忠实的复制。） 这可能是为什么科研人员越来越不愿意碰触“伪科学”或误报（ false positive ）。如同沃顿知识在线（ knowledge@Wharton ）的 一篇文章 ，得到统计显著相关结果来支持任何假设是非常简单的，在现今科研人员背负这极大发表压力的时候，他们很可能在无意间偏斜实验，使之成为心里想要看到的结果；又或者，如果有一个令人兴奋的新发现，他们可能会急着发表，而完全忽略该去检验这是否是真的有效。这个情况又可悲又令人忧虑，因为如果这个问题到后来才被关注到的话，该主题的相关发表文章都可能被撤稿。最糟的状况是没人注意到这个问题，导致坏科学的传播。 有什么解决办法呢？已经有些项目采取了正确的方向，例如 Public Finance Review 期刊2年前 公开征求复制研究 ，最近的一个活动是这是由 Science Exchange 公司与开放存取期刊 PLoS One 共同合作的 Reproducibility Initiative ，透过这个活动研究人员可以将实验外包给独立第三方进行可复制性测试，然后获得实验结果结果可复制的证明，参加者遂可将可复制的研究成果发表在今年稍后发行的 PLoS One 特别刊上。 不过，这类的活动仍然小而不够有力，我理解你的导师的疑虑，你的研究可能不容易发表。同时，在研究生涯刚起步时，复制研究能给你的研究方法一个强大的基础。 Science Careers 的一篇文章 在讲述一些资深研究人员如何鼓励他们的学生组队尝试复制先前的研究，同时帮助学生了解现有的文献的基础上，培养必要的科学思维方式。然而，还是有很多的原创研究可以进行，虽然复制研究除非具有极大突破性，不是这么容易独立发表，最好的方式是串联相关原始研究，然后在你的原创文稿中以“注脚”的方式标示复制研究的结果，如此一来，你就能在学习的同时维持发表的机会。 试试用这样的方向跟你的导师说说吧。 ∷ Eddy 博士国际期刊发表支持中心内容由 意得 辑 英文校对 专家 团队 支持提供 ∷ 【意得辑提供专业 英文论文编校 、 学术论文翻译 、 英文期刊发表一站式服务 www.editage.cn 】 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 此文同步刊载于 意得辑专家视点 频道： http://www.editage.cn/insights/期刊是否太过看重研究新意？
标签: 期刊发表
