Responding to reviewers: answer every point, and say where you changed it

Editors read your response letter side by side with the original reviews. A clear letter lets them decide in ten minutes; a disorganised one takes an hour, and tired editors decide conservatively.

Structure

• One short thank-you sentence.
• A summary of the major changes.
• Then every comment, in order, quoted before your reply.

Each reply needs three parts

• Your understanding of the comment.
• What you did.
• Where the change is — page and line.
• Without the third part the editor has to hunt for it.

Useful phrasing

• We thank the reviewer for this point and have revised accordingly.
• We have added a paragraph on page four addressing this.
• We respectfully disagree, for the following reason.
• Fixed phrasing saves time and avoids sounding defensive.

When you disagree

• You must still respond; never skip a comment.
• Explain with evidence, not with tone.
• If you can address part of it, do that and say which part you did not.
• A comment you find unreasonable often signals that the text is unclear.

Before sending

• Check no comment is unanswered.
• Check page and line numbers match the revised version.
• Leave it a day, then delete every defensive sentence.

One thing worth remembering

State where each change is in the revised manuscript.

Editors are not obliged to hunt for your revisions — and every time they have to, the chance of another review round rises, not because of your science but because of your process.

Câu hỏi thường gặp