peer review revision cover letter

• SpringerLink shop

Revising and responding

Once you manuscript has come back from reviewers you may be given the opportunity to revise it in accordance with the reviewer comments. You will usually receive a letter from the editor who handled your manuscript outlining the changes they would like you to make and links to the reviewer reports. This letter usually contains information on how to return your revised manuscript including instructions on how to highlight the changes made and when you need to return the revised version.

TIP: journals have different revision deadlines which vary from as little as a few weeks to three months depending on the revisions that need to be made. If you do not think you will be able to return a revised manuscript in the allotted time tell the editor immediately. They should be able to offer you an extension but it is best to discuss this with them as early as possible.

When revising your manuscript and responding to peer review comments you must:

• Thank the reviewers and editors for their time and comments.
• Address all points raised by the editor and reviewers.
• Describe the major revisions to your manuscript in your response letter followed by point-by-point responses to the comments raised.
• Perform any additional experiments or analyses the reviewers recommend (unless you feel that they would not make your paper better; if so, please provide sufficient explanation as to why you believe this to be the case in your response letter).
• Provide a polite and scientific rebuttal to any points or comments you disagree with. Remember if your manuscript is sent for a second round of peer review the reviewers will see this letter too.
• Differentiate between reviewer comments and your responses in your letter.
• Clearly show the major revisions in the text, either with a different color text, by highlighting the changes, or with Microsoft Word’s Track Changes feature. This is in addition to describing the changes in your point by point cover letter.
• Return the revised manuscript and response letter within the time period allotted by the editor.

The following is an example as to how to respond to a reviewer comment:

Reviewer comment:  “In your analysis of the data you have chosen to use a somewhat obscure fitting function (regression). In my opinion, a simple Gaussian function would have sufficed. Moreover, the results would be more instructive and easier to compare to previous results.

Response in agreement with the reviewer:  “We agree with the reviewer’s assessment of the analysis. Our tailored function does make it impossible to fully interpret the data in terms of the prevailing theories. In addition, in its current form, we agree it would be difficult to tell that this measurement constitutes a significant improvement over previously reported values. We have therefore re-analyzed the data using a Gaussian fitting function.”

Response disagreeing with the reviewer:  “We agree with the reviewer that a simple Gaussian fit would facilitate comparison with the results of other studies. However, our tailored function allows for the analysis of the data in terms of the Smith model [Smith et al, 1998]. We have added two sentences to the paper (page 3, paragraph 2) to explain the use of this function and Smith’s model.

Note that in both comments (agreeing and disagreeing) the author is polite and shows respect for the reviewer’s opinion. Also, in both circumstances the author makes a change to the manuscript that addresses the reviewer’s question.

Back │ Next

• Search Menu
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Urban Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Emotions
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Acquisition
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Religion
• Music and Culture
• Music and Media
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Neuroanaesthesia
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Oncology
• Medical Toxicology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Medical Ethics
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Cognitive Psychology
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Strategy
• Business History
• Business Ethics
• Business and Government
• Business and Technology
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic Systems
• Economic Methodology
• Economic History
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• International Political Economy
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Theory
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Politics and Law
• Public Administration
• Public Policy
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous chapter
• Next chapter >

18 The Cover Letter

• Published: July 2019
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

Many view the cover letter as a nuisance that must be dealt with when a manuscript is submitted. Some journals make no mention of specific requirements for the letter; others not only require it, but also have specific guidelines. The cover letter is the opportunity to speak directly to the editor with the goal of convincing her to send your paper out for review. This chapter discusses the importance of the cover letter and its essential elements.

Signed in as

Institutional accounts.

• GoogleCrawler [DO NOT DELETE]
• Google Scholar Indexing

Personal account

• Sign in with email/username & password
• Get email alerts
• Save searches
• Purchase content
• Activate your purchase/trial code

Institutional access

• Sign in with a library card Sign in with username/password Recommend to your librarian
• Institutional account management
• Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Sign in through your institution

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

• Click Sign in through your institution.
• Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
• When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
• Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Sign in with a library card

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

• Click Sign in through society site.
• When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

• View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
• View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Rights and permissions
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

When you choose to publish with PLOS, your research makes an impact. Make your work accessible to all, without restrictions, and accelerate scientific discovery with options like preprints and published peer review that make your work more Open.

• PLOS Biology
• PLOS Climate
• PLOS Complex Systems
• PLOS Computational Biology
• PLOS Digital Health
• PLOS Genetics
• PLOS Global Public Health
• PLOS Medicine
• PLOS Mental Health
• PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
• PLOS Pathogens
• PLOS Sustainability and Transformation
• PLOS Collections
• About This Blog
• About PLOS ONE
• Official PLOS Blog
• EveryONE Blog
• Speaking of Medicine
• PLOS Biologue
• Absolutely Maybe
• DNA Science
• PLOS ECR Community
• All Models Are Wrong
• About PLOS Blogs

Ask everyONE: Submitting your revision

When submitting revisions to PLoS ONE , there is sometimes confusion among authors about what files should be included. Here is a brief rundown on our requirements:

• Response to reviewers: This can either be included in your revised cover letter, or as a separate file
• New “clean” copy of the manuscript without any track changes
• Revised manuscript with track changes

While completing resubmission, you will have the option to include or remove any files that were previously uploaded during original submission. Please remember to remove any old files that have changed so that only the most up-to-date files are reflected in your new merged PDF.

To find answers to more commonly asked questions please check out our Most Common Questions page . If you have a more immediate question though, please contact us directly at plosone [at] plos.org.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name and email for the next time I comment.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Saudi J Anaesth
• v.13(Suppl 1); 2019 Apr

How to choose a journal and write a cover letter

Duncan nicholas.

DN Journal Publishing Services, Brighton, East Sussex, BN1 8UA, UK

Selecting a suitable journal for submitting a manuscript can be a complex and confusing task, and end in disappointment when a paper is rejected quickly for reasons that may not be clear to the author. There have been several articles written offering advice on journal selection, but this article is the most thorough of its kind, using recent evidence to inform the strategies presented. This article provides details on the factors involved in optimal journal selection, giving insights into how to identify suitable journals, why particular criteria are important and ideal methods to approach this task. The article also includes a spreadsheet tool for tracking information about potential titles of interest and submission details, and finally, provides notes on supporting your submission with an effective cover letter.

Why Publish in Journals

Publishing in scholarly journals is just one form of output from a research project, and one of the most significant pressures on modern academics is to produce papers and find suitable journals which will accept them.[ 1 , 2 , 3 ] This process is not always easy, particularly for Early Career Researchers, as the number of options and determining factors is increasingly complex. This paper provides detailed information on the journal selection process, but before considering this, I will first consider why journal publication remains such an important aspect of the research cycle.

Journals are the principal means researchers use to facilitate communication between other groups of researchers, between specialist fields, and to the public.[ 4 ] In addition to this, they play a key role in institutional assessment of individual researchers and groups.[ 5 ] Journals help to set intellectual, methodological, operational, technical, best practice, and many other forms of standards within their communities;[ 6 ] and through the peer review process, research is validated through the element of scientific publishing, which distinguishes it from all other communication mediums, certifying the authenticity and veracity of the research. The Publons Global Peer Review Survey[ 7 ] of over 14,300 researchers included the question “How important do you consider peer review for ensuring the general quality and integrity of scholarly communication?” Overall, 12,394 respondents answered this question, with 98% stating this was “important” or “extremely important.”

Does Choice of Journal Matter?

A report by the International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers[ 8 ] estimates the number of active journals at around 33,100 English-language, plus a further 9,400 non-English-language journals (a total of 42,500), publishing over 3 million articles a year. Though the numbers diminish rapidly when considering one specific field these figures still indicate the scale of the journal selection task, as well as the competitive nature of article submission, and the question remains: does journal choice matter?

To answer this question, this article will discuss several aspects of research publishing which may help guide or influence the decision on which journals are suitable for any particular paper. Some choices may be guided by external pressures such as funder or institutional requirements; other factors relate to the topic of the research in hand, matching aims, and scope or instructions of a journal and other factors will be personal preference.

Create a Journal Information Spreadsheet

The first step in identifying suitable journals for a paper is to create a means of capturing, comparing, and contrasting the information about each of the journals which might be deemed suitable. Creating a personalized information sheet about journals in your field will be a resource that can be returned to, updated, and expanded over time. An Excel spreadsheet template is included as supplementary material, with 29 fields of information covering everything that will be discussed in this paper. Table 1 shows an excerpt from the supplementary table .

Excerpt of the first 12 column details from the supplementary journal selection information spreadsheet

How to Identify a Journal

The following sections offer a process for identifying journals, three key methods for creating a list of potential journal names, and strategies to investigate the details of each.

Your Reference List

The first place to begin identifying suitable journals to submit is through the references which inform your own work. The journals which publish the articles you have cited are likely to be relevant choices for your own work; particularly, those which inform the most fundamental aspects of your paper such as the background research through which you developed your research questions; on which your methodology is drawn; and any work which your findings either corroborate or contradict.

Indexing Databases

You may wish to identify journals not referenced in your paper. Indexing databases such as Google Scholar, Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, or any of the many field-specific databases offer search and filtering options to identify articles and journals of interest.

Use the “advanced search” functions in these websites with keywords or short phrases of significant details and limit the publication years to the current and previous year (e.g., 2017–2018). The search results will show a list of recently published works that tell you these journals are currently active and interested in those topics.

The results from these platforms may include book titles, conference proceedings publications, or other formats which you are not interested in. Filter the results list for the most appropriate matches, adding relevant journal titles to your list. You can also use these databases to retrieve a certain amount of useful information to add to your journal information spreadsheet.

Depending on your personal preference or mandates from funders or institutions, you may be required to publish your work as open access (OA). If you wish to identify only open access journals, use the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)[ 9 ] and Science Open[ 10 ] as your search databases. Science Open indexes articles available as open access through which you may identify journals, even if they are not full OA titles. DOAJ, as the name suggests, is a comprehensive database of 12,205 open access journals, and almost 3.5 million articles (at time of writing). DOAJ has thorough criteria for assessing journals for inclusion in its database, aiming to include only journals which publish and perform peer review to a high standard; therefore, it serves as a useful resource for helping identify potentially “predatory” journals (a concept which will be discussed in detail later in this article).

Additionally, the Journal/Author Name Estimator (JANE)[ 11 ] is a useful independent platform created by academics to help authors identify suitable journals based on the abstract or keywords of a paper.

Publisher Websites

To identify journals within a specific publisher you may use their own platforms to search for keywords and topics. Most well-established publishers provide some searching and filtering functionality in their websites, but some, such as Elsevier's “Journal Finder”[ 12 ] and Springer's “Journal Suggester”[ 13 ] offer more sophisticated text-matching. Like the JANE journal locator, these platforms allow you to use your article title or abstract to produce a list of results with a similarity match score that helps you filter the most relevant options.

Aims and Scope

Once you have a list of journal titles you will need to investigate further to determine how suitable these journals really are for your manuscript. It is very important to understand the types of research a journal publishes as failure to fit this criteria is the main reason for immediate rejection of articles; “About 20-30% of the manuscripts can very quickly be categorized as unsuitable or beyond the scope of the journal.”[ 14 ]

To achieve this you will need to visit the homepages of each journal and thoroughly read around the site as well as recent articles. This may be time-consuming, but the information you obtain through this process can be referred to when you submit future papers.

The aims and scope, “about” section or other such mission-statement related page is where the journal should make clear the specifics of the subject in which it specializes. Is it a broad scope multi-disciplinary journal such as PLoS,[ 15 ] Nature,[ 16 ] or RIO[ 17 ]? Is it a large-scale multidisciplinary journal within a single field, such as eLife,[ 18 ] The Lancet[ 19 ] or New England Journal of Medicine[ 20 ]? Or does it have a very narrow focus for a specific field, such as The Lancet Oncology,[ 21 ] Clinical Infectious Diseases,[ 22 ] or Blood[ 23 ]?

If the journal mentions a national or geographical area in the title, this could mean different things which should be explained in the aims and scope. If the journal is named as regional, does it publish work which focuses on a country or geographical area, or is it simply based in that region (e.g., European Scientific Journal[ 24 ])? It may consider work from outside the region that compares populations or other findings from the area, giving the work relevance to the journal community, such as this publication, the Saudi Journal of Anesthesia, which states that it aims to “stimulate associated scientific research and communication between hospitals and universities in Saudi Arabia, the Arab countries and the rest of the World.”[ 25 ]

International journals may not simply accept papers from anywhere in the world. It could be that they accept only those papers which are created through an international authorship, involve an international range of participants or subjects, or provide evidence that is collected or relevant on a global scale (e.g., International Journal of Psychology[ 26 ]).

Make notes of whether the geographic scope will be relevant to want you need to achieve with your own work.

If the aims are not clear, look at the titles of several issues worth of papers to give you a clearer sense of what papers the journal publishes. You should get a good idea of the topics and geography of articles, as well as what the journal has been interested in over the previous year. Does your paper fit with their publication trends? Will it help to continue this trend, or will it add something new and relevant? Or does it seem unsuitable?

The aims and scope may also state the community of the journal. Is the journal intended for primary researchers, society members, people working in applied settings, industry, or the public? Does it appear that your paper is relevant to that audience?

Instructions for Authors

It is important to check this section thoroughly and to ensure your paper is formatted according to all requirements. This is one of an author's least favorite aspects of journal submission, with different journals having different instructions that create significant time reformatting should you need to submit to subsequent journals after your first. However, as inconvenient as these formatting requirements may be some journals can be very strict on enforcing them and along with the aims and scope, failure to conform to formatting instructions is A common reason for immediate rejection of papers.[ 27 , 28 ]

The types of research articles a journal accepts may be in the aims and scope or instructions for authors, but usually the latter. Look for lists of article types and details of formatting requirements for each, such as original empirical research, single studies, multivariate analysis, review articles (narrative reviews summarizing recent developments in a field, or systematic/meta-analysis, which provide statistical analysis of data over a wider timeframe). Some journals are review only some do not accept review articles at all. Case reports particularly in practical journals and applied specialities such as nursing or occupational health, and other shorter form papers, such as letters to editor, discussion or response to articles, book reviews may also be detailed.

This list is by no means exhaustive. There are many types of articles and different terminology used for each type, but be sure the journal accepts the type of paper you are writing.

Word limits are another of the more important aspects and these may differ between article types. Word counts can often apply to titles, abstracts, main text, and figure captions, so be sure to make a note of what the word count includes. There may also be limits to the number of keywords, figures, tables, and references.

Is there a preferred manuscript structure? Does the journal allow or disallow headings and are there formatting conventions? Should the abstract be structured (e.g., with headings for Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion), or is a single paragraph of text allowed?

Is there a standardized referencing or formatting style given, such as Harvard, APA, or Chicago, or does the journal describe its own formatting in detail? Is there a set template for formatting manuscripts provided in the website, or can you use a LaTeX editing template though Overleaf,[ 29 ] Authorea,[ 30 ] or other service?

Accessibility and Discoverability

Does the journal describe any social media presence, marketing activity, and the indexing databases in which it is listed? This aspect of journal selection will inform you of where your article may be found, the likelihood of your paper being promoted by the journal and discovered by readers. If the journal claims to be indexed in particular databases, can you verify this is the case by searching and finding them?

Speed of Peer Review and Publication

Journals are becoming increasingly transparent about their peer review processes and many may even provide statistics on the average peer review times or time from first submission to publication. For example, the Elsevier “Journal Finder” tool provides such peer review and production timeframes for the journals it returns in the search results. This information can be helpful for adjusting your own expectations of how long the process should take. The website SciRev provides subject-area level data on several measures of peer review timeframes, based on research in 2017 by Huisman and Smits,[ 31 ] with which you can benchmark journal processes; for example, the average time for a first decision on a fully reviewed paper in the Medicine category is 8 weeks, and from first submission to acceptance is 12 weeks.[ 32 ]

Publication Models

Is the journal closed-access subscription-based, fully open access, or a hybrid of the two? What are the fees for open access? Does it offer waivers for residents of certain countries (e.g., adopting the Research4Life program). In addition to OA fees, are there additional charges for color figures or any pages over a certain number? It is important to look for this information first in case you are met with an invoice for payments during the production stages.

The licensing and copyright options of the journal should also be made clear. If the journal is a subscription model, can you see the terms of passing copyright to the publisher before you submit? Can you obtain them to determine whether you are happy with the conditions? If the journal is open access, does it mention the Creative Commons licenses under which open access articles can be published? Does it offer a choice of options?

The publication model may affect whether the journal complies with any funding body or institutional mandates that determine where you must publish your article.

Archiving Policies

Does the journal allow you to post articles to preprint servers during the peer review stage? Will it consider papers that are already available as a preprint. Will you be allowed to post a preprint on your website after acceptance?

Both the publication models and policies around preprints can have implications for the readership and sharing potential for your work both during review and postpublication, and the rights you retain as the author of your work.

Ethics Statements and Adherence to Guidelines

Does the journal provide any ethics statements about its editorial processes, expectations of its editors, reviewers, and authors, and give information about other ethical or legal requirements it expects authors to adhere to or comply with on submitting articles.

Journal ethics may fall into two categories, both of which will be important for you to take note of Editorial/publishing ethics and research ethics. Research ethics are likely to be requirements you will need to state when submitting your article, such as evidence of institutional review board acceptance of methodologies or patient consent. Publication ethics refers to expectations regarding plagiarism, simultaneous submission to multiple journals, agreement from all authors to submit and several other measures.

The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)[ 33 ] is the definitive body on publishing ethics. Many journals are members of this organization and will display badges or statements from COPE on their websites. This should reassure you that the journal intends to conduct itself to a high standard and give you recourse should you feel anything unethical occurs in the handling of your paper. COPE provides many resources for authors which you should familiarize yourself with if you are new to the submission process or have not visited their website before.

Journal Metrics

Does the journal have a Clarivate Web of Science Impact Factor (IF) or Elsevier Scopus Journal rank score (SJR) or CiteScore, or Google Scholar H-Index? Are you required to submit to a journal with one of these metrics?

The recent Author Perspectives on Academic Publishing report by Editage,[ 34 ] based on a survey of 6,903 researchers found the highest rated factor which influenced authors' choice of journal was Impact Factor. However, the survey also reported that “one reason why authors find journal selection so difficult is that they struggle to find a journal that both has the required Impact Factor and is likely to accept their manuscript.” This finding illustrated that although Impact Factor is desired criteria for various reasons, it is not an efficient or effective means by which most authors can, or should, use to determine which journal to select. Of the 42,500 journals worldwide mentioned at the start of this paper, just 11,655 across 234 disciplines[ 35 ] have an Impact Factor. This alone illustrates how restrictive the options to authors can be when limiting the criteria to these metrics.

This paper acknowledges that the requirement to publish in Web of Science or Scopus indexed journals exists, and authors often need to select a journal based purely on metrics such as the Impact Factor or SJR, but also cautions against using this as an isolated search criteria where possible, and supports the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA),[ 36 ] which was established to “ensure that hiring, promotion, and funding decisions focus on the qualities of research that are most desirable – insight, impact, reliability and re-usability – rather than on questionable proxies” (statement from DORA Roadmap, June 27, 2018).

In addition to the Impact Factor, a journal may provide additional alternative article-level metrics on its webpages. These may be in the form of usage, pdf download, or other readership statistics, or Altmetrics[ 37 ] or Plum Analytics[ 38 ] information. These latter platforms are at the forefront of the alternative metrics movement and may give you insights into how articles from a journal are used, the communities which discuss the papers and other forms of impact, attention, and presence which are not based on citation metrics. Alternative metrics capture mentions on social media platforms, news media, blogs and websites, the use of articles in policy or other official documents, discussions on postpublication peer review sites, additions to bibliography platforms such as Mendeley, and many other sources. All this activity gives insight into the presence of the journal, what topics have been of particular interest, and the reaction with which your paper may be met.

Taken alone, the validity and integrity of using all metrics discussed in this section for assessment purposes and journal selection is questionable and inadvisable; however, these metrics do offer some function when using the database sources of these metrics as search tools in combination with other factors discussed in this paper.

Editorial Board

Look at the editorial board of the journal. Do you recognize any of the names? Are any of the board members cited in your paper? If so, it is likely that your paper is within the scope of the journal. If you do not recognize any of the board and no information is provided about their field, or even institution, you could search for some of the key members online to see if they are specialists in the area of your article.

If you are unable to find any of the members online, or their details do not match what is provided on the journal site, then you should leave this journal off your list, a situation which brings us to the final part of the journal selection section of this article: predatory publishing.

Predatory Publishing

No article discussing journal selection and open access would be complete without mention of “predatory publishing.” This term refers to publishers or journals that take advantage of the open access publishing model to be money-making operations with no regard for the scientific endeavour. This is a simplified definition of a more complex socioeconomic phenomenon that this paper will not analyze in great detail but is important enough to mention, as there is some evidence that these journals are damaging the reputation of open access as a legitimate publishing option,[ 34 ] which is a perception that needs countering.

The most commonly used term for these journals appears to be “predatory publishers” or “predatory journals.” They are also known as “fake journals,” “scam journals,” “trash journals,” “illegitimate journals,” among other terms. I prefer the term “shell journals,” as this accurately describes the lack of rigorous scholarly service, particularly peer review, and technical infrastructure required to ensure the integrity and permanence of scientific research. The term “deceptive journals” is also particularly appropriate, as often these journals make claims of integrity, peer review processes, indexing database status, or metrics to convince inexperienced authors that the journal is a more viable platform than it actually is. The core problem of these journals is perhaps in identifying what they lack, rather than how they act.

There is an increasing body of research and gray literature that aim to provide rubric for identifying problematic journals, most famously the controversial, and now closed, Beall's List, and more recently a scoping review by Cobey et al .,[ 39 ] yet none have been able to provide decisive, noncontradictory statements around any single measure or process for assessing such journals. Identification of these journals often requires a combination of problems to be apparent, and the ability to recognize the details which signify these problems. The methods and details discussed in this paper will help to identify suitable journals with confidence and ensure that by meeting all criteria required for your paper, journals with poor practices that do not offer what you need will be weeded out, regardless of who the publisher of that journal is.

Writing a Cover Letter

Cover letters are something of a controversial topic, with some journal editors ignoring them, but others paying close attention to all they receive. The number of submissions each editor must deal with may play a role in preference for reading cover letters or not but that does not mean you should ignore this step.

A good cover letter need only includes a few key features to effectively support your submission.

First, address the editor by name, but be sure you have the right name and the correct name of journal, especially if you are submitting to a second or subsequent choice journal. Author addressing the wrong editor and journal is a situation which occurs more often than you would expect and does not make a good impression.

If there are several coeditors, you could address the person you feel is the specialist on the topics of your paper. If you do not know this information, mention all by name, or simply address your letter to “Dear Editors.”

Next, the important pitch to the editor about the value of your article: Briefly describe the main theme of your paper, the relevance it has to the journal, and the contribution your paper makes to existing knowledge.

To support the description of your paper, you could check to see whether the journal has published papers on similar topics in the previous year (which you are likely to have done when researching your list). Does your paper fit with their publication trends? Will it help to continue this trend, or will it add something new that remains relevant? Make these statements in your letter and mention specific papers. It is a nice touch to imply that you are familiar with the content of the journal and helps to reinforce your claims that your paper is relevant and should be reviewed.

You may also include suggestion of three to six reviewers for process. These suggestions may not be used, but any work you can do to make the job of the editor handling the review process easier will be appreciated. These could be names of authors cited in your references, editorial board members, or other scholars you are aware of in the field. You should not suggest any colleagues, collaborators, close acquaintances, or other individuals who would have a conflict of interest in reviewing your paper.

You may also name individuals who should not review your paper. These could be close collaborators, competitors, or others you feel would not be able to give your paper a bias-free review.

Finally, formal declarations should be provided, stating your work is original, has not been simultaneously submitted to another journal, that all named authors give permission for the paper to be submitted, that you have no conflicts of interest in the findings and conclusions presented in the paper, and name any funding bodies which supported the work. You may also name any individuals who provide feedback or presubmission comments on your paper. If you have uploaded your paper to a preprint server, you should provide the reference.

This information should be no more than half a page but will efficiently convey to the editor why your paper is suitable for the journal and how it will be of interest to its readers.

Financial support and sponsorship

Conflicts of interest.

There are no conflicts of interest.

• Office of Undergraduate Research
• Current Students
• Online Only Students
• Faculty & Staff
• Parents & Family
• Alumni & Friends
• Community & Business
• Student Life
• Student Assistants
• Latest News
• What is Research
• Get Started
• First-Year Scholars Program
• Current Research Projects
• Involvement Opportunities
• Undergraduate Research Space
• About to Graduate?
• Find Undergraduate Researchers
• Request a Classroom Visit
• Presenting and Publishing
• Workshops and Training
• Office of Research

Writing a Cover Letter and Response to Reviewers

Explore the possibilities.

The main purpose of your response to reviewers is to tell the editors how you have revised your manuscript since your initial submission.   You should address each suggested revision made by the reviewers and explain how you have chosen to respond.  The document should be formatted in such a way that the editors can easily track changes made to your manuscript.  It should be organized by reviewer (e.g., Reviewer 1, Reviewer 2) and address the reviews point-by-point.  Comments and responses should be clearly distinguishable.

For example:

1.Your manuscript contains grammatical errors.  For example, on page 3, you used “their” when you should  have used “there.”

We have thoroughly proofread the manuscript and corrected all grammatical errors.

2. The second paragraph of your introduction needs more details about findings by Owl and colleagues (2017).  Be sure to explain their operational definition of “school spirit.”

We agree with Reviewer 1’s assessment of this paragraph and have decided to expand upon it.  We have provided a more detailed summary of Owl and colleagues’ findings, including the operational definition they used for “school spirit” for their study.

1. On pages 1 and 6, you did not include the year of publication in an in-text citation.

We have included years of publication as they correspond to the sources listed on the references page.

2. Two of the sources in your references lack a hanging indentation.

This error has been corrected; all sources are correctly formatted with hanging indentations.

Unless otherwise specified in the email your received from the editors, you may choose whether or not to make any suggested changes.  However, even if you do not change something that has been suggested, you must still address the suggestion in your response, and you must provide a compelling argument for your decision.

1. “Theatre” should be spelled “theater” because “theatre” is not the standard American English spelling.  This is a repeating occurrence.

While Reviewer 1 is correct that most Americans do spell the word “theater,” scholars in my field would accept the use of “theatre” in the context in which I use it in this manuscript.  Thus, I have chosen not to change this spelling.

Additionally, you should:

• Use a professional letter format (i.e., address the correct audience, state your purpose, and be signed by the author(s) of the manuscript) for your cover letter.
• Use a professional tone (i.e., use polite wording throughout the cover letter and response to reviewers, including when making your case for choosing not to follow a reviewer’s suggestion).
• Make sure you have made any changes both within the manuscript AND described them within your response.
• Make all changes and resubmit your manuscript, cover letter, and response to reviewers within the time frame allotted by the editors.

Contact Info

Kennesaw Campus 1000 Chastain Road Kennesaw, GA 30144

Marietta Campus 1100 South Marietta Pkwy Marietta, GA 30060

Campus Maps

Phone 470-KSU-INFO (470-578-4636)

kennesaw.edu/info

Media Resources

Resources For

Related Links

• Financial Aid
• Degrees, Majors & Programs
• Job Opportunities
• Campus Security
• Global Education
• Sustainability
• Accessibility

470-KSU-INFO (470-578-4636)

© 2024 Kennesaw State University. All Rights Reserved.

• Privacy Statement
• Accreditation
• Emergency Information
• Report a Concern
• Open Records
• Human Trafficking Notice

We use cookies on this site to enhance your experience

By clicking any link on this page you are giving your consent for us to set cookies.

A link to reset your password has been sent to your email.

Back to login

We need additional information from you. Please complete your profile first before placing your order.

Thank you. payment completed., you will receive an email from us to confirm your registration, please click the link in the email to activate your account., there was error during payment, orcid profile found in public registry, download history, dos and don'ts of addressing reviewer comments with manuscript revisions.

• Charlesworth Author Services
• 20 September, 2021

Dos and Don'ts of Addressing Reviewer Comments with manuscript revisions

You and your co-authors have received notification from the journal's editorial office: your paper has been reviewed and they request revisions . They have sent you an itemised list of revision requests from each reviewer, along with resubmission guidelines. Now what?

There are a range of approaches to addressing reviewer comments appropriately. Below are the best practical tips that will help you maximise your success in publishing.

Do: Celebrate the request to revise. . .

Congratulations! With any journal's review process, if your paper is not rejected, it is still alive and has a fighting chance of ultimately being accepted. The vast majority of submissions to most journals are either rejected outright or after the first review . View the request to revise as a positive outcome.

Don't: Get cocky. . . 

With that said, don't assume your paper will necessarily be accepted if revised. Acceptance depends upon many factors, only one of which is your properly revised manuscript . Many authors wrongly assume their paper has been accepted, pending revisions, when no such promise was explicitly given. 

Don't: Get defensive towards the reviewers

Understandably, as the author, you may have some emotional links to your manuscripts. After all, authors have invested greatly in their research and writing. You might think: ‘How dare this unknown reviewer ask for changes on your masterpiece?!’ Don't go down that path. By requesting revisions, the reviewers and journal editors show they are advocates for your paper . Their requests for revision are intended not to criticise, but to improve the document. 

Do: Share the reviewer comments with your writing team

Update your author team. Has everyone read the comments carefully? This practice keeps your co-authors apprised of the status of the article and provides consensus on how to revise the paper . Additionally, seeking input from co-authors affords them the opportunity to contribute not only to the initial manuscript, but to successive versions. Their individual voices and identities help shape the overall final version, creating a more representative, inclusive and diverse product.

Do: Follow every step or procedure requested by the journal's editorial office

Editorial offices will provide specific details on how to resubmit the paper, and what to include with the resubmission. Give them what they want, clearly outlined, detailed and labeled. If something is unclear, contact them to ask for clarification . It would be better to ask for details than to proceed and not address the revisions correctly.

Do: Make it easy for the editorial office and reviewers to locate and see your revisions

Along with your revised manuscript, you will submit a detailed revision letter . This letter outlines your responses to the reviewers , and how and where you changed the paper. 

There is a proverb that says, 'A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.' Even if you ultimately disagree with a reviewer comment, respectfully acknowledging their input and explaining your thought processes goes a long way towards making that reviewer an ally for your paper. Remember that each reviewer has probably spent several hours going over your submission. Effectively, they anonymously contribute diverse layers of perspective, experience and knowledge to your paper, all of which strengthen it. Showing thanks in your revision letter is an easy way to show appreciation and give encouragement in return.

Cut and paste reviewer comments into your revision letter, then address them one by one . If you make the requested changes in the manuscript, show the original text of the manuscript, and then your edited text that satisfies the reviewer's comment. Don't be concerned if your revision letter is long; clarity and precision are key with this letter.

• In the revised manuscript:
• Clearly indicate all edits (for example, using track changes, strikethroughs, highlights, text in colours, etc.). The editorial office may specify how to indicate edits.
• Use the line number function in MS Word to clearly identify edits in your manuscript. 

A Few Parting Nuggets

Exception: Add new data only if it is highly relevant to your paper. Stay focused on your topic and on your specific study. If you have additional cases to add or extended follow-up data, you may consider adding it.

Exception: Add an author if revisions are so extensive that they require additional colleagues to provide/interpret/analyse the new data for the paper. Legitimate contributions from new, diverse voices strengthens the overall academic process. If you do feel the need to add an author, contact the journal to explain your situation and ask for their protocols on doing so. Then follow those protocols.

If given a deadline for resubmission, don't miss it!

If you decide not to resubmit a revised paper, please let the editorial office know . They will appreciate the update, and this will enable them to keep their database current. 

Following these suggestions will make a positive impression on the reviewers, editor and editorial office team. They will respect the care and attention to detail you have demonstrated in the revision and resubmission of your manuscript.

Maximise your publication success with Charlesworth Author Services .

Charlesworth Author Services, a trusted brand supporting the world’s leading academic publishers, institutions and authors since 1928. 

To know more about our services, visit:  Our Services

Share with your colleagues

Related articles.

What does a ‘revisions required’ editorial decision really mean?

Charlesworth Author Services 28/02/2019 00:00:00

How to deal with revise and resubmit to an academic journal

Charlesworth Author Services 24/09/2020 00:00:00

Navigating peer review: How to respond to comments you disagree with in order to maximise your chances of acceptance

Charlesworth Author Services 20/09/2019 00:00:00

Related webinars

Bitesize Webinar: How to write and structure your academic article for publication: Module 11: Know when your article is ready for submission

Charlesworth Author Services 05/03/2021 00:00:00

Bitesize Webinar: How to write and structure your academic article for publication - Module 12: Understand the peer review process

Charlesworth Author Services 10/03/2021 00:00:00

Bitesize Webinar: How to write and structure your academic article for publication - Module 13: Navigate the revise and resubmit process

Bitesize Webinar: How to write and structure your academic article for publication - Module 14: Increase your chances for publication

Charlesworth Author Services 20/04/2021 00:00:00

Identity in review

The growing role of Identity in Peer Review

Charlesworth Author Services 20/09/2021 00:00:00

Ethics of Peer Review: Moving towards greater Inclusion, Diversity and Transparency

Differences between journal editors and peer reviewers

• Search Search
• Submitting research
• Editing a journal
• Peer reviewing
• What's new?
• How to submit

Step by step

1. Prepare your submission

Before you start, make sure you're ready by going through the checklist  and reading the  common issues  section. This means that you won't waste time having to make revisions to your submission, or risk a rejection.

Prepare your manuscript following the instructions for double-anonymous peer review journals .

If you need help, we have a range of author services designed to help you present and promote your work. Our experts can help with English language issues, scientific assessment and editing, manuscript and figure formatting.

2. Write a cover letter

Your cover letter gives you the chance to sell your manuscript to the journal editor. It introduces your work and explains why it would be of interest to readers. Keep it focused and to a single page.

• State the title of your manuscript and what prompted you to write it.
• Explain briefly what research was undertaken and what the results show.
• Describe why you think your work will be of interest to the journal’s readers. 

3. Go to the journal homepage 

Select ' Submit manuscript '. From there you'll be directed to Snapp if your journal is using it. You will be asked to log in or register with your email if you don’t already have an account.

4. Upload your manuscript and cover letter

Depending on your area of research, your submission will either be a Word document with embedded image files, or a .zip file containing LaTeX files. If a .zip containing LaTeX files is submitted, our system automatically compiles them into a PDF for peer review. You will also be asked to upload your cover letter.

5. Complete the form

Key data, such as the title, abstract, and author details, are automatically extracted by the system. These details are used throughout the peer review and publication process. You'll be asked to confirm these details and provide extra information including:

• author details and affiliations
• details of the corresponding author
• funding details
• authorship statement

You will also be asked to agree to our policies and open access requirements, and disclose any competing interests, dual publication, or use of third-party material.

Finally, you can review the submission and revisit any previous stages to make changes. There is also the option to share your work as a preprint on Research Square.

Once you are ready to submit, select ' Submit Manuscript '.

6. Track your submission

On successful submission you will have access to a tracking tool where you can monitor the progress of the submission, perform additional actions, and get help if needed. This tool will also help you track all your submissions to journals on Snapp.

What happens after submission?

After you submit, your manuscript will go through these steps on its journey to publication:

Technical check

The first stage involves an initial check when the manuscript is examined to make sure it is readable, formatted properly and that the necessary declarations have been made.  

For example, we check that: 

• all declarations are present for ethics or competing interests
• all the authors have been identified

We need to make sure all the required data is present to support the onward processes.

We use AI technology to check for plagiarism and we may reject a manuscript on this basis - even if it's unintentional. 

If you're using a well-known method or reproducing parts of data from elsewhere, you must be transparent and state this in your manuscript.

During this process, we might ask you to clarify or amend your manuscript.

Read our Common issues  section to see how you can avoid any unnecessary delays.

Editor review

Next, the manuscript will be sent to an editor who will review the content and assess whether it is suitable for publication. The editor then decides whether to pass the manuscript on to peer review.

Peer review

Peer review is a critical process in academic publishing when experts and peers review the validity and quality of the manuscript. Two or more peer reviewers are assigned to each paper and report back with their comments. They may well ask questions of you to seek further information and clarification.

Final decision

The editorial team will then consider the comments of the peer reviewers and re-assess any manuscript revisions. If they are satisfied that the manuscript is now suitable for publication, they will officially accept it and let you know.

The Springer Nature Transfer Desk Service

If you are unsuccessful at your chosen journal, our Transfer Desk team will be in touch upon rejection to make some recommendations for other Springer Nature titles you might wish to transfer your manuscript to. There is more information about this service on the  Transfer Desk webpages .

Rights and open access payments 

Once your article is accepted you'll sign a publishing agreement. 

For open access articles, you may need to pay the article processing charge (APC) - but only if you're not already covered by one of Springer Nature's open access agreements, or another source of funding. 

Read more about open access funding and support

Publication

After the agreement has been signed, you'll be sent the article proofs to approve and then, it's straight to our publication system. 

We'll notify you when your article is live and send you a link. You'll be able to track how many times it's been accessed by readers by logging into your Springer Nature account.

Quick guides

• Choose a journal
• Common issues
• Open Research
• Tools & Services
• Account Development
• Sales and account contacts
• Professional
• Press office
• Locations & Contact

We are a world leading research, educational and professional publisher. Visit our main website for more information.

• © 2024 Springer Nature
• General terms and conditions
• Your US State Privacy Rights
• Your Privacy Choices / Manage Cookies
• Accessibility
• Legal notice
• Help us to improve this site, send feedback.

• Basicmedical Key

Fastest Basicmedical Insight Engine

• BIOCHEMISTRY
• GENERAL & FAMILY MEDICINE
• HUMAN BIOLOGY & GENETICS
• MEDICAL DICTIONARY & TERMINOLOGY
• MICROBIOLOGY
• PATHOLOGY & LABORATORY MEDICINE
• PUBLIC HEALTH AND EPIDEMIOLOGY
• Abdominal Key
• Anesthesia Key
• Otolaryngology & Ophthalmology
• Musculoskeletal Key
• Obstetric, Gynecology and Pediatric
• Oncology & Hematology
• Plastic Surgery & Dermatology
• Clinical Dentistry
• Radiology Key
• Thoracic Key
• Veterinary Medicine
• Gold Membership

Working with Journals: Cover Letter to the Journal, Peer Review and Revision Process

Figure 30.1. General flow of manuscripts in peer-reviewed journals. Grey boxes represent actions by authors and green boxes represent actions by the editor and/or publication manager. Therefore, if the journal published 100 articles in 2006 and 2007 (denominator), and those articles were cited 200 times in 2008 (numerator), the impact factor of the journal would be 200/100 = 2. In other words, every article published in 2006 and 2007 was, on average, cited twice in 2008 (average citations per document). The impact factor is the most commonly used measure of the quality of a journal (used by researchers to submit papers by librarians to manage subscriptions and by publishers as a marketing tool) and it is often used in assessing the quality of publications for awarding grants and academic positions/promotions. However, it must be borne in mind that the impact factor has many limitations and is by no means a measure of the quality of a particular paper or researcher. 3. The journal should be indexed on major biomedical databases (e.g. MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE/Excerpta Medica) and readily accessible across the globe (available online, either as free content or as ‘pay-per-view’). 4. The target journal has a built-in readership (e.g. sponsoring society members). 5. The journal has access to good public relations services, as publication of research in these journals is often accompanied by press releases in the general media. Type of Publication 1. General journals tend to have higher ISI impact factors than subspecialty journals. However, subspecialty journals are likely to have a more focused audience. 2. It is worthwhile to check the types of articles published in the target journal, that is, some journals do not publish case reports while others may not publish original research or review articles. Editorial Office Standards and Efficiency 1. How is the journal funded and governed? Independently funded, subscription-based journals with an editorial board comprising recognised leaders in the field have more credibility with readers than privately funded journals without an editorial board. 2. Does the editorial office have a personal interface? In this age of online publishing, it is preferable to have a responsive ‘person’ who can be contacted to sort out any issues that may arise during the editorial processing of a manuscript, for example need for permission to reproduce a figure or a table. 3. Are the ‘instructions to authors’ accessible and clear? Different journals have different formatting requirements and it is essential to carefully read the specific ‘instructions to authors’ of the target journal before writing a paper. 4. Does the journal offer an electronic submission and tracking system? Although not essential, it is definitely useful for authors to be able to track the progress of their manuscript through the publication process using an online system. 5. Does the target journal use referees with established expertise? The editorial board of the target journal gives some idea of the type of expertise available to the journal. In addition, it is helpful to check the last issues of the journal from previous years to become familiar with the quality of peer reviewers used by the target journal. 6. Have colleagues received helpful and constructive criticism from the editorial office in the past? The quality of feedback received from peer reviewers is extremely important in revising and refining the manuscript, and the past experience of colleagues working in your area can be a useful measure of the journal’s calibre. 7. What time frames does the journal follow, that is, what are the delays between submission and initial decision and between acceptance and publication? Most top-tier journals receive a huge volume of content and there can often be a delay of between 3 and 7 months between submission and publication. Sometimes, researchers may opt for a lower tier journal that offers quicker publication over waiting for a longer period of time in a higher tier journal. Researchers should ascertain the time frames of target journals and balance the high profile of the higher impact factor journal with the urgency for publication. Of course, most established journals would provide an option to prioritise exceptional content. Some journals also offer ‘early online’ publication ahead of the print issue. 8. Does the target journal offer the option of ‘fast tracking’ for publication? Occasionally, researchers may wish their work to be published ahead of or during an important meeting or congress, but not all journals may provide the option of ‘fast-track’ publication. Therefore, in some cases a lower tier journal with option for fast-track publication may be preferred over a higher tier journal that does not offer this option. Cost It is always advisable to confirm any submission fee, acceptance fee, per-page fee and whether there is a cost associated with the publication of colour figures when selecting a journal. Open access journals charge authors for publication and subscription-based journals generate revenue from subscriptions and ‘pay per view’ streams. Some publishers of subscription-based journals charge authors for the inclusion of coloured figures while others do not. Lastly, some publishers also charge for incorporating lengthy changes at the page proof stage. Therefore, researchers should do a thorough check of the target journal before submitting their work. Principles for Choosing the most Appropriate Journal 1. Assess the content of the manuscript (basic science versus clinical and general versus specific). Look at previous issues of the intended journal and see what kinds of papers they publish. Does your paper fit the type of content the journal seems to prefer? Will the paper add to work they have already published? 2. Aim for the highest possible journal in terms of visibility and quality. 3. Balance the use of top-tier journals with the need for rapid publication in possibly lower tier journals. 4. Read instructions to authors and ensure they meet your requirements. 5. Look at recent issues of the journal and make sure you understand the journal style. 6. Consult your peers and mentors for advice. Cover Letter Many editors are experts in their fields, but they are not necessarily familiar with the entire breadth and depth of their speciality. Editors have a critical approach to the literature and are always open to reason. First and foremost, editors look for ‘novelty’ in the submitted biomedical research work. The cover letter should, therefore, clearly outline the novelty of the research. For the purpose of scientific communications, novelty can be defined as follows: First report on the subject, that is, nothing similar exists at the time of submission. Research that provides definitive data in a previously reported subject, where controversy exists. Work that extends previous findings. Largest study of the research question. The cover letter should also delineate the clinical or investigational relevance of the research. The most important/relevant research will have direct implications for management of disease, for example lead to a change in the treatment guidelines or alter current practice of treating a disease. A lesser degree of importance is attached to studies that develop or validate a method to establish a diagnosis or quantify severity of disease. These results are likely to mean that currently undertreated or untreated patients could qualify for treatment. A third level of relevance is attached to studies that establish mechanism of the disease or define prognosis, as these data can lead to the investigation of agents with new mechanisms of action and they help physicians in understanding the natural progression of the diseases. At the very least, the submitted work should be able to generate a hypothesis and stimulate interest in further testing of the research question. The cover letter should also state that the submission represents original work that is not being considered for publication in any other journal, and that all the listed authors meet the authorship criteria used by the journal (most commonly, the criteria of the ICMJE in the Uniform Requirements for Submission to Biomedical Journals). Peer Review What Is Peer Review? Peer review is the process of subjecting research or ideas, be they journal manuscripts or grant applications, to scrutiny by experts in the field. Peer-reviewed journals rely heavily on members of their honorary Editorial Boards (listed on the journal masthead) to provide expert feedback on submitted manuscripts. However, most journals also require the help of additional experts to assess the high volume of submissions and the contribution of these experts is often acknowledged in the last issue of the year or on the journal website. The peer-review process is coordinated by the journal’s editors or publication managers. Common questions asked at the peer review stage (for submitted original research and review articles) are listed in the Appendix. In addition, there is often scope for ‘confidential comments to the editor’ and additional free text ‘comments to the author’. Why Is Peer Review Important? Peer review comments are used by journal editors to screen and select submitted manuscripts. The input from external experts ensures that the journal content is balanced and provides complete coverage of the relevant information (as opposed to selective/biased citation of favourable papers in a review article). For original research articles, peer review ensures that the study design is appropriate, the right statistical analyses have been used and that the conclusions are supported by the results. The peer review process is critical to establishing a credible body of knowledge for others to build upon. Peer review gives a stamp of credibility to the contents of the manuscript because it assures readers that experts in the field have approved the contents. Manuscripts that have not been peer reviewed tend to be viewed with suspicion and a certain degree of scepticism. Types of Peer Review 1. Single Blind: The referees remain anonymous to the authors but the referees know who the authors are. This is the most common type of peer review process and the anonymity allows referees to provide objective feedback to their peers.

Share this:

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)

Related posts:

• Health Research Reporting Guidelines: An Overview
• Research Ethics for the Biomedical Sciences
• Writing a ‘Discussion’ Section in a Medical Article: An Exercise in Critical Thinking and Argumentation*
• Statistics in Pharmacology*

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Comments are closed for this page.

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

• Guidelines for Figures
• Guidelines for References
• Guidelines for Supplemental Data
• Guidelines for Tables
• Manuscript Types and Limits Policy
• Guidelines for Videos
• For Authors

Journal of Neurosurgery Information for Authors

• Share on facebook Share on linkedin Share on twitter

Founded in 1944, the flagship journal of the AANS is recognized throughout the world by neurosurgeons and related medical specialists for its authoritative and cutting-edge articles. The Journal of Neurosurgery is the most referenced journal specific to neurosurgery in publication, according to Clarivate's Journal Citation Reports™. The Editors and Editorial Boards encourage submission of clinical and laboratory studies, technical notes on instruments or equipment that is innovative or useful to clinicians and researchers in the field of neuroscience, as well as reviews, papers on historical persons or events related to neurosurgery, and letters to the editor.

• Journal of Neurosurgery  Impact Factor (2022): 4.1
• Print ISSN: 0022-3085
• Online ISSN: 1933-0693

For questions or assistance with submission, please email the JNSPG Peer Review Team .

Latest Issue

Editorial Board

Instructions & Forms

Publishing Policies

Peer Review Process

Manuscript content and formatting, open access/fees.

Subscriptions

Any manuscript that does not meet formatting requirements will be returned for correction before peer review.

Please note that all submissions are screened through iThenticate Plagiarism Prevention software.

Instructions & Forms 

• Change of Authorship Form
• Color Payment Agreement
• Manuscript Template
• New Submission Checklist
• Original Material License Agreement
• Patient/Volunteer Consent
• Previously Published Permission Request
• Revision Checklist
• Revision Cover Letter Template
• Track Changes Tutorial

All manuscripts are assigned to an Editor for initial review and triage. Manuscripts that are immediately deemed inappropriate for the journal are rapidly rejected with comments from the assigned Editor.

All remaining manuscripts are sent out for peer review. Peer review for the Journal of Neurosurgery is single-blind and reviews are performed consecutively. All reviews are conducted by our current Editorial Board members, or by an invited, specialized, ad hoc reviewer. The Editor-in-Chief reviews all manuscripts and reviewers’ comments before making a final decision.

In accordance with ICMJE recommendations the journal requires editorial board members to recuse themselves from the review process if they hold conflicts of interest or relationships that pose potential conflicts related to any articles under their direct consideration. For more information, please visit the ICMJE’s position on the reporting of conflicts of interest.

To ensure that submissions are correctly formatted, we encourage all authors to use our Manuscript Template . As a part of manuscript submission, authors are required to complete and upload the New Submission Checklist . The Revision Checklist must be completed and uploaded when submitting revisions.

For specific information regarding requirements for your manuscript type, please refer to our Manuscript Types and Limits Policy .

When preparing their manuscript, authors should follow reporting requirements specific to their subject matter. These requirement guidelines can be accessed via the EQUATOR Network website . At the time of submission, authors should submit the appropriate checklist with their paper.

The JNSPG now offers an open access license for a fee of $3000 (Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International [CC BY-NC-ND 4.0]; see http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ) for accepted manuscripts in our print journals. This option is available for manuscripts following acceptance and has no bearing on publication decisions.

Manuscripts posted to a preprint server must adhere to our Preprint Policy .

The JNSPG does not charge a submission or publication fees for the Journal of Neurosurgery ; however, there are enhancements that do carry a charge including:

• Color figures in print: $600 per figure
• Color cover (if chosen by the Editor-in-Chief): $800
• Supplemental data publication fee: $125
• Errata processing fee: $100 per affected page

Journal of Neurosurgery articles are indexed in:

• PubMed/MEDLINE
• Web of Science
• Science Citation Index
• Science Citation Index Expanded
• Current Contents - Clinical Medicine
• Current Contents - Life Sciences
• BIOSIS Previews

© Copyright 1944-2024 American Association of Neurological Surgeons

Powered by PubFactory

• [66.249.64.20|185.126.86.119]
• 185.126.86.119

• Discoveries
• Right Journal
• Journal Metrics
• Journal Fit
• Abbreviation
• In-Text Citations
• Bibliographies
• Writing an Article
• Peer Review Types
• Acknowledgements
• Withdrawing a Paper
• Form Letter
• ISO, ANSI, CFR
• Google Scholar
• Journal Manuscript Editing
• Research Manuscript Editing

Book Editing

• Manuscript Editing Services

Medical Editing

• Bioscience Editing
• Physical Science Editing
• PhD Thesis Editing Services
• PhD Editing
• Master’s Proofreading
• Bachelor’s Editing
• Dissertation Proofreading Services
• Best Dissertation Proofreaders
• Masters Dissertation Proofreading
• PhD Proofreaders
• Proofreading PhD Thesis Price
• Journal Article Editing
• Book Editing Service
• Editing and Proofreading Services
• Research Paper Editing
• Medical Manuscript Editing
• Academic Editing
• Social Sciences Editing
• Academic Proofreading
• PhD Theses Editing
• Dissertation Proofreading
• Proofreading Rates UK
• Medical Proofreading
• PhD Proofreading Services UK
• Academic Proofreading Services UK

Medical Editing Services

• Life Science Editing
• Biomedical Editing
• Environmental Science Editing
• Pharmaceutical Science Editing
• Economics Editing
• Psychology Editing
• Sociology Editing
• Archaeology Editing
• History Paper Editing
• Anthropology Editing
• Law Paper Editing
• Engineering Paper Editing
• Technical Paper Editing
• Philosophy Editing
• PhD Dissertation Proofreading
• Lektorat Englisch
• Akademisches Lektorat
• Lektorat Englisch Preise
• Wissenschaftliches Lektorat
• Lektorat Doktorarbeit

PhD Thesis Editing

• Thesis Proofreading Services
• PhD Thesis Proofreading
• Proofreading Thesis Cost
• Proofreading Thesis
• Thesis Editing Services
• Professional Thesis Editing
• Thesis Editing Cost
• Proofreading Dissertation
• Dissertation Proofreading Cost
• Dissertation Proofreader
• Correção de Artigos Científicos
• Correção de Trabalhos Academicos
• Serviços de Correção de Inglês
• Correção de Dissertação
• Correção de Textos Precos
• 定額 ネイティブチェック
• Copy Editing
• FREE Courses
• Revision en Ingles
• Revision de Textos en Ingles
• Revision de Tesis
• Revision Medica en Ingles
• Revision de Tesis Precio
• Revisão de Artigos Científicos
• Revisão de Trabalhos Academicos
• Serviços de Revisão de Inglês
• Revisão de Dissertação
• Revisão de Textos Precos
• Corrección de Textos en Ingles
• Corrección de Tesis
• Corrección de Tesis Precio
• Corrección Medica en Ingles
• Corrector ingles

Select Page

Sample Responses to Letters from Journal Editors

Table of Contents (Guide To Publication)

Appendix: sample responses to letters from academic and scientific editors.

Each letter to an editor is unique, so the following letters are only examples, but they will provide you with ideas about how to format and word your own replies to academic and scientific editors. The letters are completely fictional, with invented names and situations. The complete addresses may not be necessary if you’re communicating with an editor via email, as is so often the case these days, but I’ve included them to show the layout of a formal letter. For your own mailing address, it would be best to use university or department letterhead if available and provide your personal name, phone number and email address beneath the letterhead.

The first letter (A.1) posits that the editor is interested in the article and thinks it appropriate for the journal, but has pointed out a number of problems with the formatting, structure and referencing style of the paper as the reason for not accepting it. Whether or not the paper will be reconsidered or accepted if the necessary revisions are done remains uncertain, so the letter aims to confirm that the paper will be seriously reconsidered and ideally accepted if the necessary changes are made. It does this by thanking the editor for his helpful advice, indicating that the author understands the problems and is in the process of correcting them, and asking whether the editor would like to reconsider the paper for publication.

Assuming that the first letter received a positive response, the second letter (A.2) is designed to accompany the revised paper once all the necessary changes to formatting, structure and referencing have been made. It explains exactly what’s been done to correct the problems, addressing all of the concerns about the format, structure and references raised by the editor. It also explains one change that may prove problematic and offers an alternative solution. Finally, it verifies that a professional proofreader has checked the article and indicates a willingness on the part of the author to make any further changes that may be necessary to facilitate successful publication.

Download Word Version of Letter A1

Letter a.1: earning or confirming serious reconsideration or conditional acceptance.

Dr Sandra Jones Department of Social Sciences University of the Pacific Coast P.O. Box 101 Salmon Cove, British Columbia V2K 3L4 Canada (609) 741-8955 [email protected]

Mr Reginald Smith, Editor Journal of Changing Weather P.O. Box 707 River Rapids, Oregon 76545 USA (972) 861-9805 [email protected]

March 3, 2020

Dear Mr Smith,

Thank you for your letter regarding my manuscript entitled “Effect of Changing Weather Patterns on Home Insurance Policies: Clients Left Out in the Cold?” I’m delighted that you’re interested in the paper and think it might be appropriate for the Journal of Changing Weather .

I very much appreciate the time and effort you’ve put into your comments. Your advice about the formatting, structure and referencing style of my paper is most helpful. I’ve looked over the Journal of Changing Weather author guidelines again and see exactly where I’ve gone wrong and what changes need to be made. Once I’ve made the necessary revisions, I plan to have the paper professionally proofread to ensure that I’ve met all the requirements consistently.

However, I remain unsure about whether you’re willing to reconsider the article once the necessary changes have been made, so I’m hoping you can confirm that you’d like me to send you the revised paper for reconsideration or publication. I’ve begun working on the revisions already and will be able to return the article to you within a couple of weeks.

With thanks for your time and assistance,

[sign here for a formal letter]

Sandra Jones

Download Word Version of Letter A2

Letter a.2: resubmitting a paper after necessary revisions have been made.

March 15, 2020

Further to our correspondence a couple of weeks ago, I’m attaching the revised version of my article entitled “Effect of Changing Weather Patterns on Home Insurance Policies: Clients Left Out in the Cold?” I have now completed all of the changes you requested:

• The numerical style of in-text referencing has been changed to author-date referencing in APA style.
• The list of references has been arranged alphabetically by the last names of authors instead of numerically, and other changes to conform to APA style have been made to the references.
• The article has been restructured to include separate Limitations and Conclusions sections.
• All headings and subheadings have been adjusted to conform to the requirements indicated in the Journal of Changing Weather author guidelines, including the removal of numbers.
• All nonstandard abbreviations and acronyms used in the paper have been defined on first use and used consistently thereafter.
• Abbreviations used in each table have been defined in a note at the bottom of the table.
• The vertical rules/lines have been removed from all three tables.
• The tables are now attached as a separate file instead of embedded in the paper.

I should mention, however, that Table 3 seems a little crowded without the vertical lines separating the information in the columns, and I’m concerned that the presentation may not be as clear as it was with the lines. I see that the guidelines indicate that tables should be on a vertical/portrait page, but I also notice that a few articles in the printed version of the Journal of Changing Weather feature tables on a horizontal/landscape page, so perhaps that would be a good layout for increasing the clarity of Table 3. I’m certainly open to any suggestions you have for this table.

I’m also attaching a certificate from Proof-Reading-Service.com verifying that the article has been professionally proofread with special attention to meeting the Journal of Changing Weather author guidelines for formatting, structure and referencing.

I hope that the changes I’ve made resolve all your concerns about the article. I’m more than happy to make any further changes that will improve the paper and/or facilitate successful publication.

Thank you once again for your time and interest. I look forward to hearing from you.

This article is part of a book called Guide to Academic and Scientific Publication: How To Get Your Writing Published in Scholarly Journals . It provides practical advice on planning, preparing and submitting articles for publication in scholarly journals.

Whether you are looking for information on designing an academic or scientific article, constructing a scholarly argument, targeting the right journal, following journal guidelines with precision, providing accurate and complete references, writing correct and elegant scholarly English, communicating with journal editors or revising your paper in light of that communication, you will find guidance, tips and examples in this manual.

This book is focusing on sound scholarly principles and practices as well as the expectations and requirements of academic and scientific journals, this guide is suitable for use in a wide variety of disciplines, including Economics, Engineering, the Humanities, Law, Management, Mathematics, Medicine and the Social, Physical and Biological Sciences .

You might be interested in Services offered by Proof-Reading-Service.com

Journal editing.

Journal article editing services

PhD thesis editing services

Scientific Editing

Manuscript editing.

Manuscript editing services

Expert Editing

Expert editing for all papers

Research Editing

Research paper editing services

Professional book editing services