This is a usual occurrence when the reviewers give you a Revise and Resubmit decision on your academic manuscript. The researchers feel relieved, and this is followed by a challenge, which is how to write a perfect reviewer response letter. If you write a rebuttal in a bad way, it will lead to a second rejection. It is the one who is great at making it accepted.
Fast Publications is a company that deals with expert Resubmission Support. We assist the authors in going through the rigorous peer-review process. We are aware of how to give a successful response and how to have it in the rejection pile. You must have a letter which is both respectful, clear and accurate.
Follow these five steps. They ensure effective and professional response. These will bring your manuscript to end acceptance.
Step 1: Begin with Professional Gratitude and Overview
You should always use a polite but professional tone in your letter. Address the editor directly. This is to say thank you and the reviewers for their time and valuable comments. Any form of recognition on their part of improving your work is appreciated. That is a mere action to create a collaborative relationship at once.
Introduce a shallow summary to the thanks. Outline the key revisions that you made. Did you run new analyses? Did you re-organize the discussion section? Briefly outline these crucial changes. The editor immediately notices that you made a firm step on the key issues.
Example Opening: Thank you, we would like to have an opportunity to revise and resubmit our manuscript, [Manuscript Title]. The comments of the reviewers are welcome. They enhanced clarity and rigor of our work to a large extent. We have made significant revisions, such as new quantitative analysis and revision of the discussion of the theoretical background.
Step 2: Be Precise in Organizing Your Response
The most important factor of a good response letter is organization. You have to develop a point by point response. This simplifies the work of the editor. This is the structure anticipated by the reviewers.
First, paste and copy all the comments in the reviewer report. Bold or italics are used to highlight the text of the reviewer. This guarantees the utmost clarity. Then, submit your elaborated answer right under the comment. Label all the comments and responses in order. Response to each and every point. Do not omit even little mistakes in typing.
In case a number of reviewers mention the same point, discuss it thoroughly in the first instance. Then interrelate this in-depth answer in the following answers. This prevents repetition. It is comprehensive.
Step 3: React Immediately and Identify definite changes in the manuscript
Be specific and to the point in your answers. Never generalize. On each comment, write down what you did in the manuscript.
Did you revise a sentence? Explain the change. Did you add a new paragraph? Cite the new text. Above all give the specific position of the change. Refer to page numbers, section titles and line numbers. This makes the cross-checking of the editor and the reviewer very easy.
Sample Answer: The reviewer was right in stating that our methodology section was not very clear. We concur with this judgment. Our Team changed the third paragraph of the section on the participants on page 8, lines 150-156. We have explicitly described the inclusion criteria of all the study subjects.
In case you did not agree with a comment, apply polite and evidence based explanation. Do not get defensive or confrontational. Kindly explain your reasoning. You should prove your decision using literature or data from your research. Demonstrate that you paid attention to the comment.
Step 4: Have an Active and Professional Voice
SEO principles tend to suggest the active voice. Active voice is clear, straightforward and authoritative. This suits an official reply letter.
Passive language is imprecise and irresponsible. The editor is interested in knowing who did it. They desire to experience the obvious outcomes.
No Passive Voice: “Data analysis was done to resolve the concern of the reviewer.
Active voice: “We did a new data analysis. This directly concerns the concern of the reviewer.
Make your language polite, positive, and brief all through the document. Limited length of sentences increases the readability. They also contribute towards your message sinking well with the reader.
Step 5: Culminate with Confidence and Preparedness
Be as professional in ending your letter as when you started it. There should be a powerful closing. Restate your position that the amendments have made significant contributions to the writing. Hopefully say that the work is now up to the high standards of the journal.
Ensure that you have attached all the required updated papers. This will contain the revised manuscript which has been cleaned and a track-change version. Show willingness to carry out any last minute minor revisions that the editor might need. This shows that you are serious about the process of publishing.
Example Closing: This is a usual occurrence when the reviewers give you a Revise and Resubmit decision on your academic manuscript. The researchers feel relieved, and this is followed by a challenge, which is how to write a perfect reviewer response letter. If you write a rebuttal in a bad way, it will lead to a second rejection.
In need of Expert resubmission?
The process of review may be hectic. It is a letter, that one letter, that has been crafted to perfection that is what is all you need to succeed. Are you not sure about your tone? Are you finding it difficult to reply to a specific difficult criticism? Do not run the risk of another postponement or rejection.
Fast Publications has customised Resubmission Support services. Our consultants are capable experienced editors and academic authors. Your reviewer response letter is drafted, edited and refined. Your document will be professional, convincing, and fully in line with all journal requirements.
