Revising with Purpose: How to Use Peer Review Feedback to Improve Your Paper
I know that feeling all too well. After months of pouring your heart into your research paper and submitting it, the peer review feedback can be brutally honest. After anxious days of waiting, your cherished work is returned with a handful of harsh comments. Reading through them can be a painful experience. As a new researcher in the field, this is a common sentiment we all share when facing sharp reviewer critiques on our papers. But don't be too hard on yourself - with time and experience, you'll get more accustomed to this process. In fact, here are some positive perspectives you may not have considered when confronting these criticisms.
No revision does not always mean good news
While it may seem that receiving no revision requests is a positive sign, that is not always the case. All high-quality journals will require a rigorous peer review process, where expert reviewers in the field thoroughly evaluate your article after it has passed the initial editor screening. Typically, several experts will be designated to review your paper and provide feedback to the editor, suggesting revisions on your part. In some prestigious journals, this back-and-forth between reviewers and the author may even occur two or three times.
It is quite rare for a submitted paper to be so polished that the reviewers recommend acceptance without any revisions. With this in mind, you should anticipate the need for revisions, whether minor or major. If a submitted article is accepted as-is and in a fairly short time frame, it might be worth double-checking the journal's reputation, as it could potentially be a predatory publication.
2. They like it, it just needs a few tweaks
The fact that your paper requires revision indicates that it has already passed the initial editor's screening, where the format, scope, depth, and novelty of your research were evaluated and deemed suitable. The remaining step is to obtain feedback from expert reviewers who will thoroughly examine the paper's details.
The good news is that the reviewers also consider your paper fit for publication in the journal, despite the need for some revisions. In both of these stages, your work was not outright rejected, which would have been the easier decision for low-quality submissions. This means you are already halfway there! The only task now is to refine the article just a bit more.
3. You get free expert advice
During the peer review stage, reviewers must provide an explanation for any outcome, whether it is a rejection or a request for minor/major revisions. They need to identify the weaknesses or inadequacies of the paper and relay this feedback to the editor along with their recommendation for rejection or revision. This means you are receiving free, third-party expert advice on your research! Regardless of the outcome, you can use the reviewers' comments to further enhance your research and writing. This process serves as a valuable training ground before you write your dissertation.
4. Nobody is keeping count
During my productive PhD years, I have had more paper rejections than publications! But this does not affect my PhD status or the university's perception of me. Though frustrating, I've learned a lot from this experience. Paper rejection or revision is very common in academia, so don't take it personally. A good revision will make it more likely for your paper to be accepted the next time around.
Now that you can see the positive side of peer review, here are some quick tips on how to respond:
It's best to take time to read through the comments one by one, but avoid immediately revising on the same day. This is when the feedback may sting the most, so give yourself time to 'heal' before starting the revision process.
Categorize the comments into easy and difficult ones, then address the easier ones first, such as grammar or sentence structure mistakes. This approach can help kickstart the revision process and provide a sense of progress and motivation. Additionally, utilizing AI editing tools like Jenni.ai can save you time and strengthen your revised manuscript.
Reply to the comments tactfully. Unbeknownst to many, reviewers are not paid to review, so we should be grateful that they took the time to provide feedback to improve our paper, rather than simply recommending rejection. You may disagree with some comments, but it could also be a misunderstanding on the reviewer's part. Maintain a professional demeanor and clarify with sound reasoning.
Even if not required, provide a separate manuscript with revisions highlighted in a contrasting color, such as yellow or blue. Highlighting the changes makes it easier for the reviewer to identify them, as they may not recall their previous comments. This saves the reviewer time, which could lead to acceptance without further revisions.
Ultimately, the peer review process aims to improve your research paper, so it should not be viewed negatively. I once had a paper receive several sharp comments that prompted me to revamp my review paper. After revising the paper, it improved significantly and has since become my most-cited journal article, all thanks to the reviewers who took the time to review and provide feedback. Therefore, do not fear the peer review process - it can help improve your paper!