Response letter (reply)
I think all the authors will be familiar with it. This is what most authors need to do before they see a periodical. Why? Because most manuscripts need to be revised at least once before the publication of the journal, the papers submitted for the first time cannot meet the requirements of the journal or editing for various reasons, and all papers need to be revised. After the revision, the author needs to submit a reply and revised draft to the magazine, and Obsidian compilation reminds the author to reply to the expert's revised opinions point by point. At the same time, we should also pay attention to the integrity of the reply. It is very important to write a good reply.
I. Writing of reply: 1. At the beginning of the reply, you should provide the title and contribution number of the paper, and thank the reviewers and their suggestions for revision with a little space. 2. Respond to the expert's revision point by point. If you plan to reply point by point separately, you can briefly list the main changes made according to the review comments, and then explain that you will attach a point by point reply; If you reply point by point in the letter, you can say that the reply is at the end.
Second, matters needing attention in writing a reply
1. Fully reply to the review comments: If the author will miss or avoid some review comments when replying to the review comments again, it is recommended that the author fully reply to the review comments, even if he disagrees or does not accept the revision, he should explain the reasons. Provide a clear and detailed reply after each point to ensure that all questions raised by editors and reviewers are answered.
2. Distinguish the review comments from the reply content: number the review comments, reply them in sequence, mark the modification of the paper or point out the number of individual lines before and after the modification of the paper, and make the review comments bold to distinguish them from the reply content.
3. Classification of peer review opinions: If there are many opinions, try to classify them, such as grouping opinions related to methods and grouping opinions related to languages. If you group your opinions, remember to mention "I" in your letter.
I divided my response to the reviewer's comments into several parts.
Classification, in order to achieve a comprehensive method in my answer.
4. Respond to comments point by point: If the commenter's comments are long paragraphs, you can divide them into separate replies. If you are not sure about the meaning of a point of view, you can explain your understanding of the point of view first, and then reply.
5. Disagreement with peer reviewers: Peer reviewers are usually experts in this field. If the author thinks that the reviewer misunderstood any paragraph in the paper, it is probably because the expression is not clear enough. In this case, you can politely point out the misunderstanding and then provide the necessary explanation. You can write "I"
Sorry, this part is not clear in the manuscript. That's what I should do
I have revised the content of this part. "
If the reviewer asks for more data or makes up the experiment, but you don't think it is necessary, explain the reasons for not doing it, avoid personal reasons such as lack of funds or time, and don't show a negative attitude. You should show concern and respect for your opinion in your reply. The answer must be clear, logical and supported by evidence.
6. Addition of new materials: If any new data or pictures are added, their positions in the paper should be mentioned; if new data, tables, pictures and other materials are added in the revision process, remember to point out their positions, and bring supplementary materials to reviewers and editors if necessary, so that they can compare directly without looking for them one by one.
7. Appropriate summary: The ending is like "Now that all the corrections have been completed, we hope"
The manuscript will now be accepted without any further.
Change ",this ending may be too conceited. If you want to be direct and not rude, you can say, "We are looking forward to hearing from you.
About our submission. We are happy to answer any further questions.
And comments you may have ",this ending is formal and polite, and it also expresses the willingness to make more changes if necessary.
The above is the arrangement and sharing of SCI's reply writing methods. We must attach great importance to the revision opinions of peer-reviewed editors, and we can also need professional help while understanding the editor's intention. It is a good method to choose a professional SCI paper polishing company to polish and modify the paper.