What is a “revise-and-resubmit” decision?

What kinds of decisions does an editor make about submitted articles?

• When you submit an article to an academic journal, the editor may reject it without sending it out for review (that’s called a “desk reject”) if they think the article is inappropriate for the journal, poorly written, or doesn’t meet the formatting requirements of the journal (e.g., it’s too long).

• If the editor does send the article out for peer review and the reviews are negative, the editor is likely to reject it.

• It is highly unlikely that an article is accepted without any revisions at all.

• Major journals are also increasingly unlikely to use the phrase “I accept your article if you make revisions” unless these revisions are very minor.

A revise-and-resubmit decision is great news!

• If you get a letter from the editor saying something like “While I cannot accept your article in its present form, I would consider it again if you made the substantial revisions suggested by the reviewers”--congratulations!

• This is called a “revise and resubmit” decision and is the best you can usually expect from a top journal.

A revise-and-resubmit decision can feel overwhelming

• It can be depressing to read through dozens of comments by reviewers, all of which expect you to make changes!

• Take your time reading the reviews. You will see that some are minor and easy to change.

• Some comments indicate that the reviewer was confused or needed more information. This is good news, because it means that your revised article will be clearer and more understandable to readers.

• You can vent about reviewers’ comments to friends and co-authors, but then be prepared to respond to the reviews in a polite and respectful way.

How do you respond to a revise-and-resubmit decision?

• Read through the reviewers’ comments.

• Sometimes the editor also summarizes the main suggestions by the reviewers and may even list additional suggestions.

• Copy and paste all comments by the editor and the reviewers into a Word file. This will constitute your letter responding to all reviews.

• Save a new version of your article. This is where you will make all revisions.

• Some editors require you to mark all changes in a different colored font, or else to use track function so they can see where changes are made. Only do this if requested.

How to write the letter responding to reviews

• Along with your revised article, the editor will require you to submit a letter in which you list each reviewer’s comment along with your response.

• I usually put every reviewer’s comment in bold, and then use regular text for my answer.

• You are expected to make all the changes suggested by the editor and the reviewers.

• However, you can usually disagree with one or two of the changes, but you will need to explain your rationale in the letter.

• It is customary to begin the letter by thanking the editor for the revise-and-resubmit decision. Be sure to list the title of your article.

• Do not mention your name or the names of co-authors, because this letter will be sent back to reviewers, and so it needs to be anonymous.

• Start with the heading REVIEWER 1, followed by each comment by that reviewer. For each comment, state what you did to answer that comment.

• For example, if a reviewer wrote, “Indicate why the cross-national comparisons are important,” your answer should include (1) a general overview of what you did in the revised article, (2) the actual text, using quotation marks, of what you wrote in the revised article (even if this consists of several paragraphs), and (3) the page number(s) where that change occurred in the revised article.

• Even if a reviewer had a minor comment, such as “On p. 9, the word “discipline” is misspelled,” your answer should be something like “We have fixed the spelling of ‘discipline,’ now on p. 11 of the revised manuscript.”

What if you can’t understand a reviewer’s comment?

• If a reviewer suggests something you are unfamiliar with (e.g., a theory, a statistical technique, a measure, etc.), check with a colleague or see if you can look it up online.

• However, if the suggestion makes no sense (e.g., it is poorly written, lacks a word, or is otherwise incomprehensible), it is okay to reply to that suggestion by stating “I could not understand what the reviewer is referring to here” and leave it at that.

What if you disagree with a reviewer’s comment?

• Do not use the phrase “I disagree with the reviewer…” but instead explain your rationale in the letter responding to reviewers.

• If possible, see if you can compromise. Sometimes you can add in some text into the revised article that indicates a good-faith effort.

• For example, in an article about mentoring mid-career women faculty, my co-author and I had written about the number of books that have been written about the tensions that women professors face when they combine academia with motherhood. The reviewer indicated that there was in fact one book about fathers. Our letter to reviewers stated: “The reviewer mentions a good point; there is in fact one book about fathers. We have added a sentence on p. 6 as follows: ‘In the only comparable book about fathers that we could find (i.e., Marotte et al., 2010) , the authors assert that fathers do not report similar feelings of guilt and anxiety as mothers.’” Note that the sentence we inserted into the revised article indicates how this book is different than the ones about mothers.

This takes a lot of time

• I find it easiest to answer the minor points first—it gives me a sense that the task of revision is underway.

• Comments that are major—such as the need for more statistical analyses, or the suggestion that the entire article should be re-organized—take a lot of time.

• Many of my letters responding to reviewers are 10-12 pages single spaced, because they include lots of direct quotations where I indicate exactly how I have revised the text. I do this to show the editor how much time and effort I’ve put into the revision.

• The editor often gives you a deadline for submitting a revision. Be sure not to exceed this deadline. Start on the revisions right away.

How to resubmit the revised article

• The editor often provides a link for the resubmission.

• Often you need to delete the article and other documents (tables, figures, cover letter) that are on the journal’s web portal from your initial submission.

• Once again you will need a cover letter when you upload the revised article and the letter responding to reviewers.

• It is possible that the editor will send your revised article back out for review. They will usually try to contact the original reviewers, but those may not be available, so your revised article may go out to some new reviewers, who may have new comments.

Congratulations!

• You are well on your way, even if the revised article also gets another revise-and-resubmit decision.

• Remember that many journals have an 80-90% rejection rate, so working with a revise-and-resubmit article puts you into that top 10-20%