Mastering Manuscript Revisions: A Guide to Incorporating Reviewer Feedback

Navigating the process of revising your manuscript based on reviewer feedback can be challenging, but it's a crucial step towards refining your work. Remember, the reviewers' insights are meant to help you enhance the quality and impact of your research. Stay focused, address the comments methodically, and approach the revisions with an open mind. By carefully considering and incorporating the feedback, you're taking important step toward making your manuscript the best it can be. 

UNDERSTANDING JOURNAL RESPONSES

When you submit a manuscript, you'll typically receive one of these responses:

• Revise & Resubmit: Your manuscript shows potential but needs significant improvements. Address all comments thoroughly and resubmit. This doesn't guarantee publication.
• Major Revisions: Substantial changes are required. The revised manuscript will undergo another full review.
• Minor Revisions: Your manuscript is generally good but needs small changes. After revisions, it will be reevaluated without extensive review.
• Accept Without Revisions: Your manuscript is accepted as-is. It will proceed to the next stages of publication.
• Reject: Your manuscript doesn't meet the journal's standards in its current form. Consider revising based on feedback and submitting to another journal.

Remember: Each response, whether it leads to revisions or acceptance, contributes to advancing knowledge in your field and helps you to make your work better.

EFFECTIVE REVISION STRATEGY

Follow these steps to revise your manuscript effectively:

1) Prioritize comments: Focus on critical issues first.

2) Maintain objectivity: Approach feedback with an open mind. If you disagree with comments, take a break before reassessing.

3) Address each comment: Draft a response explaining how you've addressed each point.

4) Revise systematically: Address comments one by one, ensuring clear and substantial revisions.

5) Highlight changes: Use track changes or highlighting to make your revisions evident.

6) Follow guidelines: Adhere to the journal's formatting and submission requirements.

7) Prepare a response letter: Thank reviewers and editors, summarize changes, and explain any decisions not to make certain changes.

RESPONSE LETTER TEMPLATE

Consider using this format for your point-by-point response:

Dear Editor,

Thank you for the opportunity to revise our manuscript "[Title]". We've carefully considered all feedback and revised accordingly. Below is our point-by-point response:

Reviewer 1:

Comment 1: [Reviewer's comment] Response: [Your response, including location of changes or reasoning if you disagree]

[Repeat for each comment from all reviewers]

Additional changes: [List any other improvements you've made]

We believe these revisions have significantly improved our manuscript. We look forward to your feedback.

Sincerely,

[Your Name]

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Q: Why do I need to submit revised manuscript with marked/highlighted changes?

A: Submitting your revised manuscript with marked/highlighted changes is crucial for several reasons:

• Transparency: It clearly shows the reviewers and editors exactly what changes you've made in response to their feedback.
• Efficiency: It saves a lot of time for reviewers and editors, allowing them to quickly identify and assess the revisions without having to compare the entire document word-by-word.
• Thoroughness: It ensures that no changes are overlooked during the re-evaluation process.
• Accountability: It demonstrates that you've carefully considered and addressed each point of feedback.
• Clarity: It helps in understanding the context of your changes, especially when they're related to specific reviewer comments.
• Fairness: It allows for a fair reassessment of your work, as the reviewers can easily see how you've responded to their suggestions.

Many journals require you to submit both a clean version and a version with tracked changes. The marked version is typically used during the re-review process, while the clean version is used for final acceptance and publication if no further changes are needed.

Q: Do I need to obey all reviewers' comments?

A: While you should carefully consider all comments, you're not obligated to implement every suggestion. However, you should address each comment in your response letter. If you choose not to implement a suggestion, provide a clear, respectful explanation for your decision, ideally supported by evidence or sound reasoning.

Q: What if two reviewers want me to do two different things?

A: When faced with conflicting reviewer suggestions, consider these steps:

1. Evaluate the merit of each suggestion in the context of your research.
2. If possible, find a compromise that addresses both reviewers' concerns.
3. If a compromise isn't feasible, choose the suggestion that best improves your manuscript.
4. In your response letter, acknowledge the conflict and explain your reasoning for your chosen approach.
5. Consider consulting with your co-authors or mentors for additional perspective.

Q: How long should I take to revise my manuscript?

A: The time needed for revisions varies depending on the extent of changes required and your other commitments. Minor revisions might take a few days to a couple of weeks, while major revisions could take several weeks to a few months. Most journals provide a deadline for resubmission, typically ranging from 30 to 90 days. If you need more time, it's usually possible to request an extension from the editor.

Q: Should I seek additional help or opinions during the revision process?

A: Yes, seeking additional input can be very beneficial. Consider these options:

• Consult with co-authors to get their perspectives on addressing reviewer comments.
• If you're a student or early-career researcher, discuss the reviews with your supervisor or mentor.
• If you're struggling with clarity or language issues, consider using a professional editing service or asking a colleague proficient in academic writing to review your revised manuscript.
• If you don't understand the journal's decision or have any doubts about how to approach reviewers' comments, don't hesitate to ask the editorial team for help. We can provide clarification and guidance on how to proceed with your revisions.

Remember, the goal is to improve your manuscript, so don't hesitate to seek help when needed. However, ensure that any substantial contributions are appropriately acknowledged.