Scientific Writing – How one can Reply to the Reviewers of Your Scientific Analysis Paper


If you wish to publish a scientific paper in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, you could first submit your article for publication. The editor of the publication then sends your article by way of a rigorous technique 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 choice relating to whether or not your paper shall be printed. Many scientific journals recruit professors and others in academia who’re consultants of their discipline to tackle this position, and to assessment, consider, and decide the validity of your paper's information and references.

Typically, the reviewers will determine that your article is appropriate for publication "as is," which implies it will require no modifications in your half. However usually, they may counsel enhancements, or revisions, of the manuscript. These revisions could also be minor or substantive, however both means, you should be ready to answer them accurately when they may return your scientific article one or two months after submission.

However how, precisely, do you deal with the revision course of? What sure requirements must you take into account when responding to feedback or questions?

Here’s a checklist of crucial issues you could accomplish:

  • You should be thorough and reply every remark one after the other. I like to recommend that you just accomplish that immediately underneath the reviewer's remark, breaking your reply into a number of factors, if needed.
  • Your reply should be clear and particular, addressing all of the reviewer's considerations.
  • Give due respect to the enhancements your friends counsel, and embrace all of them in your paper.
  • Spotlight your solutions in yellow so your reviewers can simply determine them, and if potential, 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 obvious.
  • 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 want to publish your paper and are supplying you with the possibility to change your article to their journal's requirements. Take it as a praise!
  • Even if you happen to consider the reviewers' feedback should not simply, reply to them with respect.
  • In the event you return the article with out making sure enhancements, defend this alternative in a respective remark to the reviewer. Clarify why a change just isn’t potential and supply 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's your alternative whether or not to incorporate the alteration or not. Your paper shall be printed underneath your identify, and the reviewer's identify 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 just modified the manuscript in accordance with the reviewers' considerations and that you just wish to submit it once more for a brand new analysis.

Good luck together with your submission!

by Sophie Domingues-Montanari