Navigating the Peer Review Process 11-17
Introduction is now 1 page shorter and the Discussion 2 pages shorter.
3. “below” instead of “above:” You are right; “below” should have been “above.” We made this correction (now on page 11, line 15).
4. Reference 16: Reference 16 was completed.
Do not make changes in your manuscript other than those requested by the reviewers. If for some reason you need to do anything else to your manuscript — for example, redo the statistics, change your conclusion, add some data, add a table or figure, or rewrite the introduction or discussion — then you are doing something to it that has not been seen and evaluated by reviewers. If such a change is necessary, you must always bring it to the edito r’s attention. Depending on the change, some editors may treat extensively modified manuscripts as a new submission. Occasionally, you will get a review that is poorly or inadequately done. The reviewer may be cursory in his or her review, or the reviewer may misinterpret or misunderstand some of your data, your study design, or your study purpose. Some requested changes may be unreasonable, irrelevant, or even impossible. Because editors do not have expertise in every area covered in their journals, they cannot always detect a badly done review. They have to assume that the reviewers are correct in their judgment. Therefore, if you return the manuscript without doing what a reviewer requests, you will be seen as not responding to the reviewer’s comments, a nd your manuscript may be rejected. So what do you do if this happens? First, revise the manuscript in compliance with all the reviewers’ comments that you can. If you cannot do everything asked, explain why you cannot. Keep your tone professional; be logical, reasonable, and clear; and never show anger or harshly criticize the reviewer. Editors are generally receptive to a well-reasoned explanation for not complying with some reviewer requests. You might also consider having the revised manuscript and cover letter (along with the reviewers’ comments) edited before resubmitting the manuscript to the journal.
Made with FlippingBook Digital Publishing Software