Chapter 6 Response to Reviewers
Peer-reviewed journals also give the author the opportunity to respond to the reviewer’s comments.
This ‘response to reviewers’ document is submitted alongside your manuscript, summarizing the changes that you made in response to the critiques.
Follow these rules for writing responses to reviewers, adapted from Noble (1995):
Rule 1: Provide an overview, then quote the full set of reviews
Begin the response letter with a broad-level summary of the changes, pointing out new broad-level content added in response to the most essential criticisms of the reviewers.
Thereafter, the response letter should contain the complete set of reviewer comments with your responses interleaved.
Rule 2: Be polite and respectful of reviewers
Even if you are convinced that the reviewer lacks intellectual capacity, it is certainly not in your interest to convey this impression to the reviewer.
Keep in mind that if the reviewer failed to understand something, the fault likely lies, at least in part, with you for not making the point clear enough.
Your goal is to make the work clear and accessible to all readers, not just to experts.
Rule 3: Accept the blame
If the reviewer failed to understand something, apologize for not making it clear.
Even if you are convinced that the text is already clear (i.e., the reviewer simply missed it), consider revising the text and quoting the revised text in your response.
In general, even if the requested change seems unnecessary, it is usually better to go ahead and revise with the goal of showing the reviewer that they were listened to and understood.
Rule 4: Make the response self-contained
When you make changes to the text or to figures, quote the changes directly in the response. If possible, refer to the specific pages/sections/paragraphs were the change was made.
Rule 5: Respond to every point raised by the reviewer
Even if you do not agree with a comment from a reviewer, you cannot ignore it and must respond to it.
If you disagree, provide evidence supporting your claim.
Rule 6: Use typography to help the reviewer navigate your response
Use changes of typeface, color, and indenting to discriminate between 3 different elements: the review itself, your responses to the review, and changes that you have made to the manuscript.
You can explain these typographical conventions in the introduction to your response.