If you wish to publish a scientific paper in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, it’s essential to first submit your article for publication. The editor of the publication then sends your article by a rigorous means of analysis by a panel of exterior reviewers, chosen by the editor. These reviewers will then consider your article and ship their feedback to the editor, along with their suggestions for or in opposition to the article’s publication within the journal. The editor makes the ultimate resolution concerning whether or not your paper shall be revealed. Many scientific journals recruit professors and others in academia who’re specialists of their subject to tackle this function, and to evaluate, consider, and decide the validity of your paper’s information and references.
Generally, the reviewers will determine that your article is appropriate for publication “as is,” which suggests this can require no modifications in your half. However normally, they’ll recommend enhancements, or revisions, of the manuscript. These revisions could also be minor or substantive, however both manner, you should be ready to answer them accurately when they’ll return your scientific article one or two months after submission.
However how, precisely, do you deal with the revision course of? What sure requirements do you have to bear in mind when responding to feedback or questions?
Here’s a checklist of an important issues it’s essential to accomplish:
- You should be thorough and reply every remark one after the other. I like to recommend that you simply achieve this straight below the reviewer’s remark, breaking your reply into a number of factors, if obligatory.
- Your reply should be clear and particular, addressing all of the reviewer’s considerations.
- Give due respect to the enhancements your friends recommend, and embrace all of them in your paper.
- Spotlight your solutions in yellow so your reviewers can simply determine them, and if doable, present each a clear and highlighted model for his or her comfort.
- Clearly point out the place you made the requested enhancements, noting the web page quantity, and explaining the way you modified it.
- Copy and paste the preliminary sentence or phrase just under the reviewer’s remark and your revised sentence or phrase, creating an easy-to-understand “earlier than and after” sequence to make sure your message is evident.
- Use quotes, daring face, and italics to obviously separate the reviewer’s remark, your reply, and your modifications to the manuscript.
- Be well mannered and respectful. Present consideration and thank the reviewers for his or her feedback.
- Don’t take the critiques or queries personally, or as critiques; in truth, requests for revisions imply the reviewers wish to publish your paper and are supplying you with the prospect to switch your article to their journal’s requirements. Take it as a praise!
- Even for those who consider the reviewers’ feedback will not be simply, reply to them with respect.
- Should you return the article with out making sure enhancements, defend this selection in a respective remark to the reviewer. Clarify why a change is just not doable and provide convincing arguments in these instances.
- If you don’t agree with a reviewer on a sure level, you must nonetheless respect the reviewer’s perspective and integrity. However finally, it is your selection whether or not to incorporate the alteration or not. Your paper shall be revealed below your title, and the reviewer’s title won’t be talked about.
Lastly, when sending your response to the reviewers, bear in mind to incorporate a canopy letter to the editor, explaining that you simply modified the manuscript in accordance with the reviewers’ considerations and that you simply wish to submit it once more for a brand new analysis.
Good luck along with your submission!