When the manuscript is rejected, you may feel depressed or disagree with the questions asked. However, rejection and disagreement are normal parts of scientific research analysis and debate, so don't take them to heart. Remember, they just want to help you improve your paper.
If you don't understand a point, you should make it clear in your reply or write to the editor for further explanation. However, before that, please discuss with your co-authors to make sure that you all understand the reviewers' opinions and determine how to deal with them in the future.
2. Prepare the reply document.
Consider each comment and how to answer it. When writing a reply, you should be clear and concise, and use evidence to explain the changes you have made or the reasons for your specific handling of opinions.
3. Respond to each comment and suggestion for revision one by one.
Copy and paste each opinion into a new document (don't just mention "reviewer 1, opinion 1", because it takes time for journal staff to cross-quote). Please write a reply after each comment.
Mention what changes you have made. Don't just mention page numbers, use line numbers, or quote the beginning of a sentence in a specific part.
Explain clearly which suggestions you object to and why (and give your evidence).
Positive, polite and concise.
4. Don't miss the deadline!
Most journals have a specific deadline for receiving revised manuscripts. Be sure to answer on time! Plan your reply time so that you have enough time to write your reply and modify the article. If you need to re-query the data or make a lot of changes, such as reducing the number of words or adding extra content, you may need to spend some time.
5. Don't contribute to other journals.
Even if your paper is completely rejected, don't directly submit it to another journal. Maybe other journals will give similar opinions (maybe even use the same reviewer! ), so you should revise the paper according to the feedback, and then determine the next step.
What if the reviewer disagrees?
This situation is actually very common. For example, reviewer 1 may say "Table 2 is redundant-please delete it", while reviewer 2 may say "The data set in the third column of Table 2 needs further explanation." Which suggestion should you adopt? Judge for yourself and ask for the opinions of the co-authors. In your reply, clearly explain why you chose to delete data instead of adding data. Again, when referring to the changes you made, be clear-mention the specific number of rows/tables, what changes you made and why.
..... What if my thesis is still rejected?
In this case, discuss with your co-author how to respond and decide whether to complain to the journal editor … or contribute to other journals instead. As mentioned above, before fully considering the nature and scope of other journals, don't rush to contribute to them.
The above content comes from Charlesworth's paper tips, I hope it can help you, thank you.