MECHANISM AND MACHINE THEORY

This is my second article in MMT after last year. The main purpose is to share with everyone what to pay attention to when submitting a manuscript.

First, the line spacing of the manuscript should be set to single line spacing. This is mainly because some reviewers prefer to print the manuscript for review, which helps them save paper.

Second, try to enlarge the images in the manuscript, as well as the symbols and letters inside. In Word, you can adjust the size to 100% to view. If you can't see clearly under this condition, there is a high probability that the editor-in-chief will ask for modifications.

I have had two submissions returned for the above two reasons, so it can be considered as experience.

Lastly, if the editor-in-chief returns the manuscript and says there is a language issue, it is probably related to the abstract, introduction, and conclusion, so polish these three parts well.

After submission, the first round of review generally takes no more than two months. If there is a second round, it usually won't exceed two months either. If there are major revisions needed from the first round to the second round, the editor-in-chief may give you a rejection, but encourage you to resubmit after making the revisions. This is how my second article was accepted. After completing the revisions and resubmitting, it was accepted in less than a month, and then published online in half a month.

Therefore, the efficiency of this journal and publishing house is excellent! I believe MMT is highly cost-effective for articles related to institutional studies.

The review speed is indeed quite fast. The first review took about a month. It had major revisions and there were two reviewers who provided very constructive comments on how to improve. I took about a month to implement their dozens of suggestions. The second review also took about a month and only had a few minor issues. After making the necessary changes, the paper was accepted the next day after resubmission.

Additionally, it is advisable to seek native language editing for English. Reviewers generally pay close attention to language issues. Before submitting, I repeatedly reviewed the paper with my teacher, used various grammar software for error checking, and during the final review, one of the reviewers patiently revised the abstract and kindly suggested having a native language reader proofread it. It was only after their revisions that it sounded authentic. For the major revisions in the first review, I sought native language editing and indeed there were some issues with articles, determiners, adjectives, verb usage, etc. It may be the case that my original writing was not incorrect, but it sounded awkward. It was only after the native language editor made changes that it became more comfortable to read. (I have previously published two SCI papers without seeking editing. The editing was done for free by someone the editor found during the final publication process, and the extensive modifications were quite distressing. I even wondered why it was published in that state.)