Once you have implemented your revisions and your co-authors are happy with the changes made, you next resubmit your paper alongside a
It is beneficial to make your response letter as
Separate out the individual reviewers comments into single components, and then respond to every comment in the clearest manner possible, stating the location of changes, or backing any points of dispute up with further references.
Find an example of a response letter document here!
This method ensures you have fully read and responded to all the reviewer comments extensively and have provide relevant responses. You should respond to all areas, even the compliments, as a comment: ‘We thank the referee for these comments’.
Constructing responses to comments
Always be polite in your response letter - whilst you might not always like what the referee has to say, you must
You would not appreciate comments which are closed, short and unhelpful - as they devalue the time and effort put into your manuscript. Ensure your responses reflect this also, out of respect for the time spent reviewing your manuscript also.
Whilst it can be overwhelming to receive many comments, this can also be interpreted as the reviewer being
Comments you disagree with
a. It is okay to disagree with referees, but ensure it is done in a diplomatic and polite way which ensures the referee is valued. Do not write emotionally charged comments or phrases, ‘We totally disagree,’ ‘It is in fact clear that’ – these sound ungrateful, arrogant and sour. Instead, write scientifically and carefully. Identify areas of agreement, ‘We agree with the referee …but…’
b. Answer with Evidence and make it accessible. Ensure you explain why and cite references in your reply.
Comments you believe to be wrong
Referees can make mistakes, whether these are scientific, or a misread of text - respond to the comment politely, either directing the referee to the relevant piece of text in the manuscript, or providing a sound argument of evidence with references.
Rude referees
This can happen, and it is unfortunate and unnecessary, and is condemned by Journals. If this is the case, a complaint to the editor can be raised and request for re-review submit.