内河 2021-06-07

This editor is quite strange. He works for a large international consulting company and is slow in handling manuscripts. I wrote him an email about the rejection letter, and he replied, "That's just how competitive the world is." This is my first research paper. I have presented it at major conferences before and received a lot of positive feedback. A prominent scholar sitting next to me even gave me a thumbs up, and during the conference dinner, a professor sought me out to give me positive feedback. Some people may say that speaking well doesn't mean writing well, but this article was carefully crafted under the guidance of my mentor and there were no issues with the writing. This journal has truly taught me a lesson. *Insert manual smiley face.* True warriors can give it a try. Alternatively, if one of your co-authors has a connection to the editor of this journal, you can also give it a try.

内河 2021-06-07

I submitted a paper for review in the 18th year, and it took almost a year to receive the review results. The first reviewer provided minor revisions, while the second reviewer provided major revisions. The third reviewer made the following comments, of which I will highlight a few sentences: "In this first model, you should only have betas, and no lambdas, if I understand the model specification correctly." My inner voice: If you can't even understand a slightly modified utility function, which is a routine matter, and still question if you understand it correctly, then I'm sorry, you don't. The third reviewer is not even from our field, and if the editor carefully examines the review comments, they will realize that he didn't understand it at all. They directly sent a rejection letter.