2019年学术期刊投稿策略与技巧.ppt

學術期刊投稿策略與技巧;學術期刊投稿策略與技巧;目錄;學術期刊之分類 I;學術期刊之分類 II;學術期刊之分類 III;科學研究方法;;;理論基礎;Theory Building;When the evidence corroborating certain laws is Overwhelming and when the laws are held to be of extreme central significance or importance to a discipline, the laws are called;Theory;What are not theory;Exploratory Research;方法論;;學術期刊投稿策略 I;學術期刊投稿策略 II;學術期刊投稿策略 III;如何投稿學術期刊 I;如何投稿學術期刊 II;經驗談— Reviewer’s Comments I;It is clear that the author(s) have spent a lot of time preparing this paper but I am afraid to say that I think that the conceptualisation of the research problem needs to be refined and the paper re-written before it could be considered for publication. 1. At times the paper is written in a tortuous and opaque style that makes the arguments unnecessarily difficult to follow. One aspect of this problem is that supporting arguments are only briefly developed and thus the reader still has questions about the logic of the arguments put forward by the author(s). For example, social capital is discussed as if there is only one way of defining the concept with no reference to the debate about the nature of social capital, how it is defined and what are the links, if any, with the other elements of the conceptual framework. 2. The lack of development of the key concepts leads to questions about the conceptual framework and whether information exchange, social capital and frequency of contact are separate constructs. Could information exchange and frequency of contact be aspects of social capital? They may not be, but as the paper is developed at present, there are still questions about the conceptualisation of relationship quality. This may be one reason why the paper is not easy to read as the author(s) are grappling with arguments that can be further refined. It follows from this that the author(s) should develop their literature review and probably make the hypothesis development section shorter. Also it is unusual to wait until the research design and methodology secti