First off, congratulations on receiving a revise and resubmit! Before you do anything else (including reading the rest of this article) go treat yourself, whether that means grabbing a fancy coffee, going for a long walk with a good friend, or binge watching your favorite series on Netflix (go ahead, I’ll wait).
Okay, now that you’re ready to get started, here are some tips on how to effectively manage and respond to reviewer feedback.
As a graduate student myself, these are tips I have learned over multiple first-author revise and resubmits and numerous conversations with my research mentors who have guided me through some hefty, and at times disheartening, reviews. I have divided the tips into two sections: 1) general advice for approaching the revision process, and 2) a practical step-by-step guide.
General Advice:
- If you are feeling overwhelmed by the quantity or type of comments, it may help to take the perspective that this is another learning opportunity, like many other things you do in graduate school. Try and take this as an opportunity to learn from multiple experts in your field who read your work and provided feedback. You can learn from this feedback and integrate it into your future work.
- Try not to take feedback from reviewers too personally. If there are any positive comments about your work, this is great! Highlight them and/or save them in a separate word document to go back to and read later. If there are no positive comments, that is also okay. Tone, quality, and quantity of reviewer feedback vary substantially. At the end of the day, your paper was invited for a revise and resubmission, which means that your peers have identified great potential in your manuscript. Keep this in the back of your mind as you work through the comments.
Step-by-Step Guide:
- The first thing you should do is copy and paste all reviewer comments into a document, separating them by theme and/or section (e.g., Introduction, Method, Results, Discussion). Do not worry if your document is 10 pages long, it’s going to be okay! Lengthy reviews often have a lot of overlap between reviewers and/or include run-on sentences that are irrelevant to the specific issue that you must address. Identifying these common themes can make overwhelming reviews feel much more manageable, allowing you to make significant progress on multiple reviewer comments at once. For lengthy reviewer comments, it may be helpful to bold or highlight key portions of the comment.
- Go ahead and draft responses (and make associated manuscript changes) addressing the easier comments. This will help you cover some ground quickly and feel like you are making some progress toward resubmission. Be sure to direct the reviewers to the location of changes in the manuscript (it is often required to include the page and line number of each revision).
- For the more challenging comments, draft out your initial thoughts on how to respond. Be sure to thoroughly address all reviewer comments. For long comments, I find it helpful to highlight the entire comment and then undo the highlighting for each portion as I address them, making it clear what is left. Then, you can bring them to a meeting with your supervisor (or co-authors) to discuss and elicit feedback. Responding to reviewer feedback is like building any other skill – try, elicit feedback, and then try again!
- Seek outside supervision where needed. For instance, if a reviewer puts detailed comments about your statistical analyses, and/or suggests that you employ an entirely different statistical methodology, do not be afraid to consult with other experts who are not authors on the manuscript. I have consulted with outside experts on reviewer comments related to issues of preregistration and data analytic approach and have found it very helpful to get a third opinion from someone who is unattached to the manuscript. You may even consider doing so via X (formerly Twitter), which is a pretty common way nowadays to connect with other experts in the field who are often eager to support trainees in their quest for knowledge.
- It is okay to disagree with reviewers on points that you feel strongly about (or at least those that are rooted strongly in empirical evidence). If you disagree and choose not to implement a particular reviewer suggestion, be sure to explain and cite your rationale. Make it clear that you have thoroughly considered their perspective in doing so. Keep in mind that reviewers may have personal preferences for how things should be done; if such preferences can be easily implemented, it may be best to take the path of least resistance.
- Ask for clarification if you need it. Reviewers are often busy academics or professionals like you, and they may have provided feedback in a rush, leaving comments that are hard to decipher. You can always send an email to the editor seeking clarification regarding an unclear reviewer comment (the worst that can happen is they say no!). Especially if the comment seems like a major point, asking for clarification may save you another round of revisions.
- Once your response to reviewers is about ready for resubmission, go back and ensure that you have expressed gratitude for reviewer comments (as appropriate) and that the tone of your response is professional. Reviewers are not paid and have taken time to read and provide feedback on your work. Often their comments may provide a perspective that you had not previously considered and will serve to strengthen your manuscript. Even when reviewer comments seem harsh, it is typically in your best interest to respond in a friendly tone. If you are concerned about how the tone of your responses might be interpreted, ask a colleague to read over them.
I hope that these comments are helpful! Getting a revise and resubmit is a huge accomplishment, and you are one step closer to having your paper accepted. Now go get that first author pub!
Acknowledgements: Thank you also to my wonderful mentors, Diana Rancourt and David de Jong, for their training and support in the revise and resubmit process.