secondvorti.blogg.se - Accepted with revisions

#Accepted with revisions how to

It’s positive to be asked to revise the study and it’s good to be asked to make ‘major revisions’ to the work’.

To answer the student’s question about the paper, ‘Yes, this is good news. This is a very important insight and something to have in mind when you respond to the changes asked for in the first round of review. ‘Do you think that the authors of this paper have made the necessary changes to their work, in light of the first round of comments, such that this manuscript can now be accepted for publication?’ The reviewers who provided the initial first set of comments are going to be asked by the editor: In contrast, an editorial decision of ‘major revisions’ almost certainly means that the peer reviewers of your work are going to be asked to take another look at the paper.

#Accepted with revisions how to

We've written about rejection and how to manage this experience before in earlier posts many of the world’s most famous scientists had papers rejected early in their careers. The journal editor will most likely make their final decision about your paper based on the changes you now make to the work as well as the contents, its originality and the way you write your response letter. The big difference between these two decisions in our experience is whether, or not, your paper will be returned to the peer reviewers for further comments once you have made changes to your work.Īn editorial decision of ‘minor revisions’ on your paper means that your work will almost certainly not be going back to the original peer reviewers for a further round of comments indeed this is policy for many journals.

Reject– clearly, the one you want to avoidĮditors are most likely to write back to you after initial review and recommend either ‘minor revisions’ or ‘major revisions’ to your paper.

Major revisions - the decision we received in this case.

Minor revisions - the best you can hope for after the first round of review.

Accept- almost never happens after the first round of review.

Consider the range of decisions available to a journal editor following initial peer review of your paper: Is this good news? What does this really mean? We've often found myself explaining these kinds of journal editorial decisions to students. As you can see, the reviews suggest that MAJOR REVISION of your paper is required.’ I have now received referee reports for your paper entitled "xxxx”, which are detailed below. Their paper came back from review the other day with a decision of ‘ major revisions required’. This student is handling manuscript submission and thus all communications with the journal editorial office. What does a ‘revisions required’ editorial decision really mean?Ī research team of one of our editors has a paper working its way through the submission system with a major biology journal the editor helped to write the paper alongside a PhD student who works with the group.

Core Skills for Early Career Researchers.