The crumbling of new periodical papers is not the absence of content, but the “rejection of writing” — an issue that has been difficult to fix for six months, and the writing logic has been confused; the overnight revision of the first draft, which has been beaten back; the high rate of review, which has become even more confusing; and even the false publication, which has been wasted for months, and the last one is empty。
The whole of this paper is entirely new, without any repetition of past content, without any kind of bullshit, without any kind of routine, and with all the help of the new hands, from the selection of subjects, the preparation of preliminary drafts, the optimization of grinding, to the examination of heavy weight, the screening of periodicals, and the delivery of scripts, each step gives a concrete and achievable approach, without a blind trial, without having to catch up at night, with new hands reading them directly and significantly increasing the rate of inputting。
I. Selected topics: avoiding 2 fatal errors and fast-fixing 2 formulae
The author's contribution was rejected, and 70 per cent of the issues were on the list. Many people either choose the topic “big and empty” or the topic “no value”, but by avoiding two faults and using two formulas, they can quickly define the subject and match the requirements for journal admission。
Mistake 1: the selection is too broad and insufficiently written. For example, the “new media communication study” “study of rural renewal and development” appears to be ambitious and lacks concrete entry points, writing in general terms and editing at pass。
Wrong 2: the selection of the subject is worthless and repeated. Some newcomers, in an effort to reduce their difficulties, chose topics that had been repeatedly studied many years earlier, without any innovation, did not meet the admission criteria for periodicals and would naturally be rejected。
Formula 1: demand-led + specific scenario = appropriate subject. For example, a novelist can write “under the double-reduced policy, difficulties and recommendations for improving the implementation of after-school services in townships and primary and secondary schools”; a novelist in science can write “the impact of short video platform algorithms on user fascination and interventions”, with both specific scenarios and practical needs, with periodicals preferred。
Formula 2: existing research + micro-innovations = high-scoring topics. There is no need to pursue “subversive innovation” by adding a new case, data or perspective to existing research. For example, existing research focuses more on urban short video dissemination, and you can focus on “rural short video transmission dilemmas and optimising pathways”, and micro-innovation can emerge。
Additional reminder: before a topic can be decided, it is important to search the key words in a wide-ranging manner, identifying more than 10 core literatures that have been in existence for almost three to five years, to avoid the awkwardness of having no literature to refer to and argue。
Ii. Preliminary drafting: 3 steps to be completed, no late drafts
Numerous new writings, where they come from, lead to confusion in logic, focus and anxiety. It takes one to two hours a day to master these three steps, so we don't have to stay up late。
Step 1: set up a very simple framework (one day to go). It does not have to be written word for word from the beginning, first to build the core framework, then fill it in, and the logic is clearer:
• introduction (200 words): the opening point is the background of the research, the inadequacy of the existing research, and the objective of the study in this paper is not to stretch the surface and hit the core
Core argument (1,500-2000): carried out in two to three small points, each of which follows the “views + arguments” model, which can be literature, data or case studies, avoiding general expressions
• conclusion (150 words): summarizing the core findings of the research, echoing the research objectives in the introductory statement, without repeating the previous text, so that it is simple and condensed。
Step 2: filling (5-7 days). Each day, a module is filled around the framework, focusing on two points: firstly, language should be standardized, avoiding verbalization, rather than “i feel” “probably”, instead of “in this paper”, “researched”; secondly, each paragraph speaks only one core point, line 3-5, and adapts to mobile phones。
Step 3: initial check (1 day). To check the consistency of logic, clarity of perspective, accuracy of references in the literature, and to focus on “legitimate confusion and irregularity” in order to ensure the integrity of the first draft。
Iii. Optimization of grinding: 4 details to improve the quality of the paper and avoid the rejected mined areas
With the completion of the first draft, it will be possible to significantly improve the quality of the paper, reduce the probability of rejection and give the editor a bright eye, without rushing to make a contribution and optimizing four details。
1. Language optimization: elimination of redundant statements, harmonization of professional terms and avoidance of confusion of terminology; replacement of oral expressions with academic ones to ensure smooth, logical and without grammatical errors。
Optimization of the case: supplementing the arguments to ensure that each view is clearly supported by the deletion of unfounded formulations; reordering the paragraph to make the reasoning more consistent and following the closed circle of “question-analysis-solving”。
3. Format optimization: uniform fonts, line spacing, page margins (conventionally four and 1. 5 times the line spacing of the song), two blank spaces at the beginning of the paragraph to avoid stacking of large paragraphs of text, with an appropriate thicker focus。
4. Bibliography optimization: organized in gb/t 7714 format, with priority given to core literature for nearly three to five years, with a description of precise, uniform format, avoiding omissions, error quotations and cross-references。
Iv. Re-weighting of inspections: efficient compliance, non-stamping of academic red lines, one-time compliance
Journal papers focus on rigidity, with different weight standards for different periodicals, newers not blindly downweight, mastering the methodology, compliance and efficiency, and one-time compliance without pitfall。
1. Check tool selection: use in stages to avoid errors. The first draft is screened with free tools (paperpass free version, papersmart) to mark red-marked content, with a focus on changing the red-marked part of the large paragraphs, and is reviewed in a formal database before it is finalized, using ic net, all-powerful, etc., to confirm that the review rate meets the requirements of the targeted periodicals (15 per cent for the general publication, 10 per cent for the core, 5 per cent for the sci)。
2. Core weight reduction techniques: instead of symmetrical substitution, read the core meaning of red content, rephrased in their academic languages, retained core professional terms and did not change the original content of the paper; divided the reded paragraphs into several sub-paragraphs to complement the analysis with their own perspective, reducing repetition rates; and regulated the literature by controlling the reference ratio of 20 to 30 per cent and accurately indicating the source。
3. A reminder of the determination not to falsify or tamper with research data and literature, not to use irregular weight-reduction tools, not to delete the core views and arguments of the paper, to maintain academic integrity and to avoid touching the academic red line, which could affect graduation and job titles。
Reviewing and contributing to periodicals: selection of periodicals to avoid unfairness and increase recruitment rates
It is not as well-written as it is, many of the newcomers are in the process of making their contributions, misinforming and water issues, resulting in the non-recognition of results and even loss of money. Accurate and screen regular periodicals with the following skills and contribute efficiently。
1. Formal periodical screening (2 steps completed):
1 records: access to the network of officials of the national press and publications agency, full titles of periodicals, access to documents and documents of the cn/issn, and, in the absence of a file or a formal number, to fake publications and unattached publications
Check-in: regular periodicals are usually recorded in at least one of the official databases, such as know-your-welf, whip and others, without access to the information received。
2. Practice skills of freshman contributors:
1 fit-up periodicals: selection of periodicals in conjunction with the academic level of dissertations, priority for newcomers to gain experience in popular publications, non-blind delivery of core periodicals, sci periodicals, and avoidance of repeated refusals against confidence
2 official contributions: contributions through a network of journal officials or official mailboxes to avoid third-party intermediaries and to reduce the risk of fraud; careful reading of the briefing notes prior to the submission and confirmation that the subject, format and length of the papers meet the requirements of the periodicals
3 review communication: timely follow-up of review progress after contribution, beyond the review cycle promised by the periodicals (3-6 months for the upr and 6-12 months for the core) and be polite and prompt to review; after receipt of the revision, the revision is targeted and the response is sincere, indicating the thinking behind the revision。
Newbies have to see: 3 key reminders for writing journal papers
1. Not to pursue perfection: for the first time, the first draft has been completed without the need to dwell on details, and then it has been gradually refined to avoid delay in starting because of the pursuit of perfection
2. Pre-planning time: longer publication cycles for periodical papers, 3-6 months for general publications, 6-12 months for core publications, advance planning and avoidance of time constraints for water and fake publications
3. Multi-reference core literature: read core literature for nearly three to five years, learn from others ' writing ideas, reasoning methods, rather than replicating them, and build on their logic and framework to enhance their writing skills。
In factJournal articlesIt is not as difficult as it would have been to have the new product in hand, to avoid common error zones and to move forward step by step, so that the newcomers can come out and make their contribution easily, without having to stay up late and be repeatedly rejected。
Interactive topic: have you ever been denied a journal paper? Is it the choice, the writing or the checking? You leave a message on the comment section, and you share your experience in hiding
It's a collection of papers, and you can read them whenever you want
# thesis of the journal #Freshman's paper# i don't know #Paperwork# i don't know #Writing skills# thesis is back down #
