Research & publication

How to respond to reviewer comments on your manuscript

In short

Answer every comment, point by point, in a response document that quotes the comment, gives your reply, and shows exactly what changed and where. Be polite and specific. When you disagree, explain why with evidence. A clear response makes the editor's decision easy.

A method that works

  1. Read the decision letter twice, then set it aside for a day before replying.
  2. List every comment from the editor and each reviewer, numbered, in a table.
  3. Sort them into quick fixes, analysis or data requests, and points you may disagree with.
  4. Revise the manuscript with tracked changes, noting page and line numbers.
  5. Write the response document: comment, response, change made with its location.
  6. Check the deadline and ask the editor for an extension early if you need one.

Writing each response

  • Thank the reviewer once at the start, not in every reply.
  • Answer the question asked, directly, in the first sentence.
  • Quote the revised text so the reviewer does not have to search for it.
  • If you cannot do what was asked, say why and what you did instead, such as adding a limitation.
  • If you disagree, stay courteous and give references or data.

Example

Reviewer commentResponse
The sample size justification is unclear.Thank you. We have added the calculation, assumptions and reference to the Methods (page 6, lines 112–118): “A sample of 18 per group provides 80% power to detect…”.

If the paper is rejected

Use the reviews to improve the manuscript before sending it to another journal. Consider a journal whose scope fits better, and check any transfer option the publisher offers.

Frequently asked questions

Do I have to accept every reviewer suggestion?

No, but you must respond to every point. Where you disagree, explain why politely, with evidence.

Should I include line numbers in my response?

Yes. Give the page and line numbers of each change so the reviewer can find it quickly.

What if two reviewers contradict each other?

Explain the conflict to the editor, state which approach you followed and why.

Related

Need help with your project?

Book a free 20-minute consultation. We reply within 1 working day.

More in Research & publication

Research & publication

Research synopsis: structure and common mistakes

A research synopsis is a short plan of your study, usually 5 to 15 pages, submitted for topic approval. It must show a clear research gap, specific…

27 September 2026 · 6 min read
Research & publication

How to spot a predatory journal before you submit

Predatory journals charge publication fees without providing real peer review or genuine indexing. Before you submit, verify every indexing claim…

27 September 2026 · 5 min read
WhatsApp us Free consultation