Responding to reviewers
Publishing is hard work: it takes a long time, and a lot of effort. Even once a paper is finally submitted to a journal for consideration, the process is far from over. There is still peer review to receive and respond to, and a paper may go through more than one round of revisions before it can be accepted for publication. This process can be confusing, and overwhelming for novice authors who have not yet published their work in peer reviewed journals or books. This Prezi thus explains what peer review is for in academic publishing, and how publishers and authors can benefit from it. It offers a few illustrative examples of how an author could respond to journals editors, when resubmitting a revised manuscript. Further, it includes tips on how to manage feedback, and general advice on communicating with journal editors especially. The links and extra reading beneath the video are added for further reading, and advice.
Who else might find this useful?
This material is primarily for postgraduate and postdoctoral scholars, to assist them with managing peer review and preparing a revised paper for a journal or edited book. This can also be used in writing for publication workshops, along with the suggested extra readings and resources.
Explore these additional resources
- Choosing the right journal (internal link)
- Doing revisions: http://wp.me/p3VNfn-8m ; https://patthomson.net/2015/04/16/revision-its-not-just-about-cutting-words-out/ ; https://patthomson.net/2014/02/24/good-academic-writing-its-about-revision-not-editing/
- Peer review: https://patthomson.net/2017/06/19/when-peer-review-is-scent-marking/
- Responding to peer review: http://matt.might.net/articles/peer-review-rebuttals/; https://www.editage.com/insights/how-to-respond-to-comments-by-peer-reviewers ; https://patthomson.net/2011/08/19/journal-etiquette-2-what-to-do-with-a-poor-review/
- Getting support in the review process: https://patthomson.net/2014/10/20/3610/