夏老师 wrote:
The editor's response
To: Authors, MS #85-02-22-RRRRRR
From: Editor, Journal of Educational Psychology
Thank you for your thoughtful response to my decision letter concerning the above-referenced piece of excrement.
I have asked several experts who specialize in the area of research in which you dabble to have a look at your pathetic little submission, and their reviews are enclosed. I shall not waste my LaserJet ink reiterating the details of their reviews, but please allow me to highlight some of the more urgent points of contention they raise:
Reviewer A has asked me to inform you that, as his suggestions were not mentioned in my previous decision letter, he resents you calling him sadistic and imbecilic. He has no quarrell with arbitrarily tyrannical.
Reviewer B suggests that you cite his work EXCLUSIVELY in the introduction. He has asked me to remind you that he spells his name with a final "e" (i.e., Scumbage), not as you have referenced him in the last version.
Reviewer C indicates that the discussion can be shortened by at least 5 pages. Given the fact that the present Discussion is only three pages long, I am not certain how to advise you. Perhaps you might consider eliminating all speculation and original ideas.
Reviewer D has asked that you consider adding her as a coauthor. Although she has not directly contributed to the manuscript, she has made numerous comments that have, in her view, significantly improved the paper. Specifically, she believes that her suggestions concerning the reorganization of the acknowledgments paragraph were especially important. Please note that she spells her name with an em-dash, and not with the customary hyphen.
My own reading of the manuscript indicates that the following problems remain:
By "running head," we do not mean a picture of your son's face with legs attached. Please provide a four- or five-word title for the paper that summarizes the report's most important point. May I suggest, "Much Ado About Nothing"?
Please make certain that you have adhered to APA stylebook guidelines for publication format. Please direct your attention to the section entitled, "Proper Format for an Insignificant Paper" (2001, p. 46).
Please submit any revision of the paper on plain, blank stationery. Submitting the article on Stanford letterhead will not increase your chances of having the article accepted for publication.
Please doublecheck the manuscript for spelling and grammatical errors. Our experience at the Archives is that "cycle-logical" slips through most spellcheck programs undetected.
Although I am not an expert in quantitative methodology, it is my understanding that the "F" in F-test does not stand for "f___ing". Please conduct a word search and correct the manuscript accordingly.
Yours sincerely,
Editor, Journal of Educational Psychology
p.s. - If your original submission had been as articulate as your most recent letter, we might have avoided this interchange. It is too bad that tenure and promotion committees at your university do not have access to authors' correspondence with editors, for it is clear that you would be promoted on the basis of your wit alone. Unfortunately, it's the publications that count, and I'm sorry to say that JEdP is not prepared to accept this revision. We would be perfectly ambivalent about receiving a seventh revision from you.
翻译如下：
--------------------------------------------------------昏割一下-----------------------------------------------------
给#85-02-22-RRRRRR 的作者
来自教育心理学杂志（ Journal of Educational Psychology ）
我请几个专家看过了你这篇玩票的小文章。意见随信附上，我就不浪费墨水了，但有几点特别重要的我一定得说一下。
审稿人A要我告诉你，你说他残酷低能他很生气，你说武断专横这点他没发表意见。
B建议你在引言里面引用他的作品。他还特别强调了，他名字最后是个“e”，比如Scumbage（估计这就是B本人了），你引用的时候拼错了。
C说你的讨论部分应该缩短5页以上。你的讨论只有3页，所以我也不知道说啥了。要不把你自己的意见或者推论都删了？
D想作为共同作者，她要我问问你的意见。她认为她给了太多宝贵意见。她名字中间有个长破折号，不是我们一般用的连号（注：编辑是不是故意在暗示作者审稿人是谁？大概我想太多了。。。。）
我自己还有点意见，供你参考：
“running head”是指用4、5个词简要概括文章要点，不是PS 一张你儿子的脸下面就是腿的图片。比如说“你没别的事可做了吗？”（注：原文为"Much Ado About Nothing"? 是不是故意拼写错误？因为后面编辑说文章之前写的一塌糊涂 ）
请注意你文章的格式啊！！！！！参考2001年APA（美国心理学协会？）的指南，直接去看《不重要论文的格式》一章!!
普通信纸投稿就好了，用斯坦福大学的专用信纸不会增加被接收的概率的！！！！！！！！！！！（斯坦福悲剧了。。。。。。）
拜托你一定检查两遍拼写和语法，“cycle-logical”(汗死。。。。。作者连psychological都能拼错成这样，还投心理学杂志)这种错误，检查软件是查不出来的！！！！
我不懂统计学，但我想F-test的F不是F*U*C*K的缩写！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！你能不能查下出处，把这个弄对喽！！！！！
P.S. 你的初稿要能象你的回信一样口齿清楚，我们大家都能节省些时间精力。我真想把你的回信给你们人事科看看，光凭这封信你都应该晋升正教授！！（It is too bad that tenure and promotion committees at your university do not have access to authors' correspondence with editors, for it is clear that you would be promoted on the basis of your wit alone.）我得告诉你，我们不打算接收这次的修改稿，全编辑部都为要收到你的第七稿纠结着。。。。。。。。
------------------------------------结束的昏割线------------------------------------------------------
看到这终于明白了， 原来我一直同情的这位作者，也不是个省油的灯啊！
我的社区
签到
赛默飞实验室产品焕新计划有奖调研！
【七月征文】不一YOUNG实验“猿”
报名开启：ICS2024第十三届光谱网络会议！
推荐收藏！盘点中药材及饮片检测解决方案
