Constructive Strategies for Working with Reviewers: From Manuscript to Successful Publication

Introduction: Peer review is a critical stage in the process of publishing academic articles, ensuring the quality and reliability of submitted data. However, for authors, interacting with reviewers often becomes a challenging task requiring not only professional expertise but also the ability to respond constructively to criticism. Skillful responses to reviewers' comments can significantly increase an article's chances of acceptance and successful publication.

Purpose: This article aims to provide a comprehensive guide for authors of scientific publications on handling reviewer feedback. It focuses on strategies for effective interaction with reviewers, recommendations for writing persuasive responses, and managing the process of revising and resubmitting an article.

Main Content: The article thoroughly examines the steps involved in preparing responses to reviewers’ comments, including analyzing feedback, structuring replies, and using a respectful tone. It discusses common mistakes authors make when responding, such as overlooking critical comments or providing insufficient justification for proposed changes. Examples of phrasing are provided to help authors effectively clarify their position or agree with reviewers' suggestions. Additionally, strategies for addressing ambiguous or conflicting comments are explored. Practical advice on improving the quality of scientific work based on reviews is presented, including recommendations for revising the text, making structural changes, and strengthening arguments.

Conclusion: Responding to reviewer feedback is not merely a formal process but an essential aspect of scientific communication that enhances research quality. Mastering the art of crafting persuasive and constructive responses not only increases the likelihood of article acceptance but also strengthens the author's standing within the academic community. The recommendations presented in this article will help authors confidently address reviewer comments and effectively advance their scientific research toward publication.

1. Косычева, М.А. (2021). Рецензирование как инструмент научной коммуникации. Health, Food & Biotechnology, 3(1), 7-12. https://doi.org/10.36107/hfb.2021.i1.s102

2. Тихонова, Е.В., & Раицкая, Л.К. (2021). Рецензирование как инструмент обеспечения эффективной научной коммуникации: традиции и инновации. Научный редактор и издатель, 6(1), 6-17. https://doi.org/10.24069/2542-0267-2021-1-6-17

3. Calcagno, V., Demoinet, E., Gollner, K., Guidi, L., Ruths, D., & de Mazancourt, C. (2012). Flows of research manuscripts among scientific journals reveal hidden submission patterns. Science, 338(6110), 1065–1069. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1227833

4. Clark, P. C., & Dunbar, S. B. (2003). Preliminary reliability and validity of a Family Care Climate questionnaire for heart failure. Families, Systems, & Health, 21(3), 281–291.

5. Clark, P. C., Spratling, R., Aycock, D. M., & Marcus, J. (2023). The real secret to getting published: Responding to reviewers. Journal of Pediatric Health Care, 37(5), 570–574.

6. Franceschet, S., Krook, M. L., & Wolbrecht, C. (2023). Submitting to Politics & Gender: Advice from the editors. Politics & Gender. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X23000193

7. Guyatt, G. H., & Haynes, R. B. (2006). Preparing reports for publication and responding to reviewers’ comments. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 59(9), 900–906.

8. Linton, J. D. (2019). Responding to reviewers. Technovation, 86–87, 1–2.

9. Morse, J. M. (1996). Revise and resubmit: Responding to reviewers’ reports. Qualitative Health Research, 6(2), 149–151.

10. Nahata, M. C., & Sorkin, E. M. (2019). Responding to manuscript reviewer and editor comments. Annals of Pharmacotherapy, 53(9), 959–961.

11. Noble, W. S. (2017). Ten simple rules for writing a response to reviewers. PLoS Computational Biology, 13(10), e1005730.

12. Pickler, R. H. (2019). Evaluation of science through peer review. Nursing Research, 68(4), 255–256.

13. Robbins, S. P., Fogel, S. J., McLaughlin, H., Pomeroy, E. C., Busch-Armendariz, N., & Staller, K. M. (2016). From the editor - Publish, don’t perish! Strategies for getting published in peer-reviewed journals. Journal of Social Work Education, 52(3), 251–257.

14. Shaw, J. D. (2012). Responding to reviewers. Academy of Management Journal, 55(6), 1261–1263.

15. Silvia, P. J. (2019). How to write a lot: A practical guide to productive academic writing (2nd ed.). American Psychological Association.

16. Sundström, A. (2023). Responding to reviewers: Guidelines and advice. Politics & Gender, 19(2), 630–635.

17. Tikhonova, E., & Raitskaya, L. (2021). Improving Submissions to Scholarly Journals via Peer Review. Journal of Language and Education, 7(2), 5-9. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2021.12686

18. Watson, R. (2020). The contribution of peer review to scholarly publishing. Nurse Author & Editor, 30(2), 1–5.