You already know that after submitting your article for peer review, they review it and provide comments and suggestions.
Then, you should explain to the editors that the section that needs revision is correct. Do you know how to respond to them?
In this topic, we are discussing this process, and we go through the “Point by Point Response to Reviewers” and explain how many methods you can use to respond to the reviews of your article.
If you want to know more to response to reviews more politely to make a good effort, this topic is just for you.
We are delving into the methods of responding point by point to the reviews. Let’s dive in.
How to Response Point by Point to the Reviewers?
First, let’s define the point-by-point response:
A point-by-point response to reviewers addresses each reviewer’s comment or suggestion individually and systematically.
This approach confirms that all reviewer feedback is addressed and your response is not confused or ambiguous.
A point-by-point answer to the reviewers’ criticisms is the most efficient approach to reply. In other words, you respond to each reviewer’s unique criticism. This enables the peer reviewer and EditorEditor to see how you solved each identified issue.
What Are Tips to Write a Point-by-Point Reviewer Response for Enhanced Manuscript Acceptance?
The reviewer response section is a crucial component of your revised manuscript submission, providing an opportunity to showcase the enhancements made and address any lingering concerns from the initial review process.
By correctly writing an effective response, you empower reviewers and editors to fully assess your revised manuscript and recognize the significant improvements achieved.
1. Highlight Your Revisions and Address Misunderstandings Thoroughly
To have a clear point-by-point response to reviewers, you must delve into the changes implemented in response to reviewer feedback, demonstrating your proactive approach to improvement.
Pay attention to completely explain the rationale behind these changes and how they enhance the overall quality of your research.
2. Clear Up Misunderstandings and Establish Clarity
You must respond to any points of misunderstanding or misinterpretations raised by reviewers.
With a point-by-point reply, you can provide detailed explanations and evidence to clarify any ambiguities and ensure a seamless understanding of your study’s nuances.
3. Increase the Value of Your Revised Manuscript
Take advantage of this opportunity (point-by-point response) to showcase the remarkable progress made in your research to the reviewers.
You can emphasize the significance of the revisions implemented and how they elevate your study’s overall quality and impact.
Also, remember that:
– In your overview, focus on the points the EditorEditor mentioned in the decision letters.
– When responding to each reviewer, include their exact comments and provide your responses. Do not jump from one comment to another without addressing each one individually.
– Make sure to respond to every point raised by the reviewers. If you were unable to address a particular point, explain why briefly.
– It’s okay to DISAGREE with some of the reviewer’s comments. Keep your response professional and constructive, and make sure your arguments are based on scientific reasoning.
– While specificity is important, keeping your responses concise is also crucial. Please make your answers brief and to the point.
If you pay attention to all the points mentioned here, you will send a strong point-by-point response to reviewers while explaining the value of the work you have done. You can check the next section if you want to have some examples.
An Example of a Point-By-Point Response to Reviewers:
If you want a clear vision of a correct point-by-point reply, look at the examples in this section.
Reviewer 1:
The Reviewer’s Comment: The introduction is too lengthy and could be shortened.
A point-by-point response: We agree with the reviewer that shortening the introduction could improve. We have made the following changes:
a) We have removed extraneous information and focused on the most important points.
b) We have reorganized the information to make it more concise.
c) We have added a clear thesis statement summarizing the paper’s main point.
The Reviewer’s Comment: The methodology section is not well-written and could be more detailed.
Read More: Declaration in Research Paper Sample
Conclusion
If you’ve ever written a point-by-point response to reviewers, you know how crucial it is to improve your manuscript’s quality and increase your chances of publication.
By addressing reviewer feedback effectively, you showcase your dedication to refinement and demonstrate the enhanced version of your research.
Do you want a complete sample of a point-by-point response to reviewers? If your answer is positive, write for us in the comments so we can start sharing it with you.
