![]() ![]() Think of the process as an opportunity to improve your manuscript, which will increase the likelihood that it will be useful to other researchers. One of the functions of peer review is to encourage you - the author - to deliver stronger, more robust research. By letting some time pass, you give yourself the opportunity to let your emotions subside, important for preventing an impulsive and heated response, which you would undoubtably regret later. While you should be mindful to return your revisions with a timely response, allow yourself a while to process the comments before looking over them again the following day. You will be given a time frame for the revisions so don’t succumb to the pressure to reply immediately. When the decision letter arrives, read over the comments…Take time to understand the reviewers’ feedback and consider what they are asking you to do. Here are four simple tips to help you respond to reviewers’ comments and fast track your paper for a positive decision! C: Comprehend (keep your cool!) Receiving criticism and defending your research takes practice. Supervisors are often so busy that the process of submission and revision is something of a mystery when starting out. This is a normal reaction for a fledgling researcher. The revise and resubmit notice comes as a complete shock! How could the reviewers not love your brilliant data commentary? Maybe they just didn’t understand it…after all, it was a totally ingenious interpretation. Your submission was brilliant – well written, novel – one could say…perfect! You went over every data point, checked every figure and poured hours into polishing the text before submission. There are many other fancy things, like letting a CI build your paper on each commit to a remote repo, but that's a story for another time.More than likely, you’ve had one eye trained on your inbox for weeks, willing an acceptance notice to come sailing in. Here is how it looks like in the final diff.html: Git diff -word-diff -color submission1 HEAD content.md full.bib | sh ~/bin/ansi2html.sh | sed -e 's|| pre |g' > diff.html diff.html : content.md content.tex full.bib Makefile Here is the complete rule for your Makefile (if you have one). use a make rule to generate it automatically, e.g.use a script to convert terminal colors to HTML.Let's improve that with ansi2html and few tweaks: Will give you a difference output, colored, on a terminal. git diff -word-diff -color HEAD file1 file2 file3 Latexdiff was already mentioned, but if you use some kind of a version control for you paper (you rather should if you use it anyway for your code), there is another option. Including this document also helps the journal editor detect unfair and incorrect criticism from reviewers, which happens a lot, including when the reviewers don't really read the paper.Īside from a separate document, where you can much better and in a more focused manner reply to the requests of the reviewers, I tend to prepare a full diff, even if only for myself. If you disagree with a comment, explain why (diplomatically). Reply: I have reframed the argument as follows: "xxx"ĭo this for every comment from every reviewer to show that you've done everything they asked you to do. Set the document up like this:Ĭomment: Please clarify your argument about xx on p. The final important step is to submit a separate document that describes your changes persuasively. Color blind reviewers might see your changes in gray, which is OK too. I don't think you have to worry about color printers as the reviewers will most likely read your revised paper on the screen, not hard copy. Some journals ask you to highlight your changes. An alternative is to track only your insertions, not deletions. The big disadvantage of this is that if you delete a large section, it gets moved to the right margin and is pretty messy. That way you have an exact record of everything you deleted and inserted. ![]() The most common and most accurate method is to use the change tracking function of MS Word (under the Review tab). ![]() ![]() Often the journal editor states exactly what you should do. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |