A decision of "major revisions" can feel discouraging, but it means the editor sees potential in your work. How you respond often decides whether the paper is accepted. A clear, respectful, point-by-point response makes the editor's job easy.
Before you start revising
- Wait a day before replying. First reactions to criticism are rarely the best ones.
- Copy every comment into a table and number them (R1.1, R1.2, R2.1…).
- Sort comments into quick fixes, substantial changes and points you may respectfully disagree with.
- Check the deadline and ask the editor for an extension early if you need new analysis or data.
Principles of a good response
- Respond to every comment, even if only to say "Corrected, thank you."
- Be specific: state exactly what changed and where (page, section and line numbers).
- Quote the revised text for important changes so reviewers do not have to search for it.
- Stay polite and professional, even when a comment seems unfair.
- Highlight changes in the manuscript with tracked changes or coloured text, as the journal requests.
How to disagree respectfully
You do not have to accept every suggestion. If you disagree, thank the reviewer, explain your reasoning with evidence or citations, and — where possible — add a sentence to the paper that addresses the underlying concern. Editors appreciate reasoned disagreement far more than silent non-compliance.
Response letter template
Dear Editor,
Thank you for the opportunity to revise our manuscript "[Title]" (ID: [number]). We thank the reviewers for their constructive comments, which have improved the paper. Below we respond point by point. Reviewer comments are in bold, our responses follow, and changes in the manuscript are highlighted.
Reviewer 1, Comment 1: [Copy the comment]
Response: Thank you for this suggestion. We have [describe change]. This appears in Section 3.2, page 8, lines 140–152: "[revised text]."
Reviewer 1, Comment 2: [Copy the comment]
Response: We appreciate this point. However, we respectfully retain [approach] because [reason and citation]. To address the concern, we have added a clarification in the Limitations section (page 15, lines 310–315).
Final checklist before resubmitting
- Every comment has a numbered response
- Page and line numbers match the final revised file
- Any new references are added to the reference list in the journal's style
- The abstract still reflects the revised paper
- A clean version and a marked-up version are uploaded, if required
The bottom line
Reviewers and editors want to see that you took their time seriously. A thorough, well-organised response is often the single biggest factor in turning "major revisions" into "accepted".
