Revising a manuscript after receiving a revise-and-resubmit decision from a top-tier journal can be just as arduous as developing a new paper from scratch. In this editorial, based on our experiences revising papers over the years, we provide roadmaps and guidelines for completing successful revisions for top journals. In doing so, we offer practical tips for completing three major tasks—making sense of a review packet, revising a manuscript, and crafting responses to reviewer comments. We conclude by recommending that authors be active reviewers themselves because, by doing so, they can develop their own insights on how peer review works and become more skillful at revising their papers and responding to reviewers
Background: The publication of articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals is a fairly complex and...
Writing for academic journals is highly competitive and are accompanied with challenges that will co...
Once a manuscript is submitted, the journal editor decides whether the manuscript merits further pee...
Most of the premier academic journals in all fields routinely have rejection rates of 80%, 95%, or h...
It is worth mentioning that rarely it happens that a paper is accepted as such after its submission....
This editorial discusses what reviewers are looking for when they make comments and suggestions on t...
Before having your paper accepted for publication in a peer reviewed journal you’ll almost certainly...
While there are benefits to collaborative research, navigating group dynamics can also bring challen...
Peer review is key in academic publishing, and rejection (or at least being asked to resubmit your p...
The peer review process can be challenging. In this essay, the journal’s editor and editorial assist...
In academia, peer review functions as a quality-assurance mechanism which also aims to improve the s...
In our last editorial (2018, v. 2) we addressed the desk review (DR) process, the first challenge fo...
Abstract In one of our past year’s editorials, we discussed the (critical) role played by reviewers...
Editors and publishers of scholarly journals rarely agree on what makes for a good publication; they...
Despite criticism and allegations of suppressing innovative ideas, Peer Review is widely cited as ce...
Background: The publication of articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals is a fairly complex and...
Writing for academic journals is highly competitive and are accompanied with challenges that will co...
Once a manuscript is submitted, the journal editor decides whether the manuscript merits further pee...
Most of the premier academic journals in all fields routinely have rejection rates of 80%, 95%, or h...
It is worth mentioning that rarely it happens that a paper is accepted as such after its submission....
This editorial discusses what reviewers are looking for when they make comments and suggestions on t...
Before having your paper accepted for publication in a peer reviewed journal you’ll almost certainly...
While there are benefits to collaborative research, navigating group dynamics can also bring challen...
Peer review is key in academic publishing, and rejection (or at least being asked to resubmit your p...
The peer review process can be challenging. In this essay, the journal’s editor and editorial assist...
In academia, peer review functions as a quality-assurance mechanism which also aims to improve the s...
In our last editorial (2018, v. 2) we addressed the desk review (DR) process, the first challenge fo...
Abstract In one of our past year’s editorials, we discussed the (critical) role played by reviewers...
Editors and publishers of scholarly journals rarely agree on what makes for a good publication; they...
Despite criticism and allegations of suppressing innovative ideas, Peer Review is widely cited as ce...
Background: The publication of articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals is a fairly complex and...
Writing for academic journals is highly competitive and are accompanied with challenges that will co...
Once a manuscript is submitted, the journal editor decides whether the manuscript merits further pee...