友情提示：以下期刊信息可能会有更新，仅供参考，请在投稿前自行登录期刊官网仔细核实。
期刊名
CORROSION REVIEWS
CORROS REV
ISSN / eISSN
0334-6005 / 2191-0316
目标和范围
Corrosion Reviews is an international bimonthly journal devoted to critical reviews and, to a lesser extent, outstanding original articles that are key to advancing the understanding and application of corrosion science and engineering in the service of society. Papers may be of a theoretical, experimental or practical nature, provided that they make a significant contribution to knowledge in the field.
研究方向
电化学
冶金工程
材料科学：膜
CiteScore
5.70
查看趋势图
CiteScore 学科排名
| 类别 | 分区 | 排名 |
|---|---|---|
| Chemical Engineering - General Chemical Engineering | Q2 | #77/272 |
| Chemical Engineering - General Chemistry | Q2 | #122/407 |
| Chemical Engineering - General Materials Science | Q2 | #148/453 |
Web of Science 核心合集
| Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) | Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) |
|---|---|
| Indexed | - |
| 类别 (Journal Citation Reports 2023) | 分区 |
|---|---|
| ELECTROCHEMISTRY - SCIE | Q3 |
| MATERIALS SCIENCE, COATINGS & FILMS - SCIE | Q2 |
| METALLURGY & METALLURGICAL ENGINEERING - SCIE | Q2 |
H-index
26
出版国家或地区
ENGLAND
出版商
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
出版周期
Quarterly
年文章数
40
Open Access
NO
通讯方式
FREUND PUBLISHING HOUSE LTD, PO BOX 35010, TEL AVIV, ISRAEL, 61350
认证评论
Major revision (01-Mar-2021)
Reject with possible resubmission (26-May-2021)
1. The time taken by the editor may exceed that of the reviewers.
2. There were two reviewers, one provided some minor issues, while the other reviewer, who seemed to be from a different era, wrote a bunch of problems by hand, leading to a major revision suggested by the editor.
3. After completing the major revision, one reviewer suggested accepting the paper directly, but the ancient reviewer claimed there were still issues without specifying them. In the end, the editor rejected or suggested resubmission.
What frustrated me the most is that the ancient reviewer wrote down all the problems throughout the paper, but the English was completely incomprehensible. I had to guess and interpret on my own, and some of the problems were also unrelated to the field. My paper is around 20 pages long, and it took me more than 20 days to extract and address each problem handwritten by the ancient reviewer, replying point by point. The response alone ended up being over 20 pages. However, it was all in vain as the ancient reviewer didn't acknowledge it and dismissed me with a few simple words. I'm frustrated, I give up.
Add your recorded webinar
Do you already have a recorded webinar? Grow your audience and get more views by easily listing your recording on Peeref.
Upload NowAsk a Question. Answer a Question.
Quickly pose questions to the entire community. Debate answers and get clarity on the most important issues facing researchers.
Get Started