FEATURE
How to Respond to Reviewer ’ s Comments
1 , 2
Saheed Olaide Jimoh
Current Address : 1 Leadvert Limited , Abeokuta , Ogun State , Nigeria . 2 Agriculture Research Group , Organization of African Academic Doctors ( O-AAD ), Nairobi , Kenya . E-mail Address : sahjim05 @ gmail . com
Peer-review system was established to scrutinize and validate scientific findings before they are released for public consumption through publication . Navigating the established system involves communication between authors , editors , and peer-reviewers .
Your response to the reviewer ’ s comments is an important part of the peerreview process because it summarizes your answers to reviewers ’ critiques . Below are some Do ’ s and Don ’ ts when responding to reviewers ’ comments .
• Appreciate the editor and reviewers , stating how their critiques have helped improve your article . See the example below :
Dear Editors and Reviewers :
Special thanks to you for your letter and the scholarly comments on our manuscript entitled “ ARTICLE TI- TLE ” ( ARTICLE ID ). The explanations provided are all invaluable and very helpful for revising and improving the quality of our paper . They provided insights for future research as well . We have studied the comments carefully and have made the necessary corrections .
The revised portions are marked in yellow in the revised article or we have used the review pane in MS word to show the corrections made . The primary corrections in the paper and the response to the editor and reviewer ’ s comments are as follows :
• Show politeness and respect in the tone of your responses .
Politeness is important . The reviewers have invested their time to evaluate your article . Recognize any misunderstandings on your part , for example , a poor presentation that may have confused the reviewer . In your responses , do not imply incompetence or a lack of expertise on the part of the reviewer but make everything clear enough to understand . If you feel the reviewer lacks understanding of your work , attacking the reviewer is not the next step .
Remember that the reviewer ’ s failure to understand your work may be because you did not explain it well . Besides , the reviewer may also be discourteous . Nevertheless , a rude comment should not be met with a rude response . Moreso , your interest is to get your scientific findings out there to make an impact .
• Keep your responses short .
Copy and paste the reviewer ’ s comments on your MS . Then provide your response beneath . Always keep your answers succinct and direct . See the example below :
Should you also include a glossary of the terms used in the survey form in the appendix ?
A glossary of terms used in the survey questionnaire has been included in Appendix B .
• Employ the use of typography to make your revision clear
You can use different colours , typeface , bold , or indenting to differentiate between the reviewer ’ s comments , your response , and the changes you made in your article .
• Respond to each comment and make it clear .
Respond to each comment separately , referring to the corresponding line numbers . If the line number ( s ) change due to the revision , point the reviewer to the new line number ( s ). This will help save time when reassessing your work .
• Don ’ t be apologetic in all your responses .
Peer review is an intellectual engagement . If you are the cause of a misunderstanding , apologize reasonably , revise it , and quote the revised text in your response . However , do not apologize in your response to every comment . It sends a negative signal about you and the credibility of your research .
• Where possible , follow the reviewers ’ instructions .
Generally , don ’ t give the impression that you can ’ t do additional work ( e . g ., review , experiment , discussion ) to improve the quality of your article .
However , where such additional effort will not add value to your work or is out of your study ’ s scope , you can politely inform the reviewer about this , providing grounded justification ( s ).
If the reviewer asks for 10 stuff , and you claim 9 is out of scope , there may be a counter-response . In such situations , you may need to do some of those things and show why and how they are out of synch with your work .
• Finally , revise your response to the reviewer ' s comments for clarity and conciseness .
When you finish responding to the comments . Take a short break , then come back to revise it again to be sure everything is in order .
Grassroots Vol 22 No 2 July 2022 48