Ready to Revise, but Writing to the Journal Editor?
A few days ago you received a message from the editor of that journal you were hoping might publish your paper, but the message did not contain the positive news you expected. Instead, you were informed that your manuscript could not be accepted for publication. Fortunately, the editor was interested enough in your work to explain the problems, and you have given his or her feedback serious consideration in the days that followed. You probably had a good conversation with at least one colleague as well, or maybe you sought advice from your favourite mentor. Either way, you have decided exactly how you will approach the revisions that will, you believe, address the editor’s concerns and render the paper publishable.
The next step is to communicate your plans for the paper to the editor and ensure that he or she will in fact reconsider your work if you revise it as you intend. This will not be a particularly easy letter to write, but these tips may make the task a little less onerous.
• Approach the letter with enthusiasm, an open mind and a positive attitude. These will shine through your writing and help in every way.
• Be courteous and respectful. Beginning your letter with an acknowledgement of gratitude for the helpful feedback is an excellent idea.
• Write well. Make sure your prose is clear and precise and that all errors have been eliminated. If language is a problem in your manuscript, the best way to prove your ability to resolve the problem is to write an accomplished letter.
• Be specific and informative about what you plan to change and how you plan to change it, but do not inundate a busy editor with unnecessary information. Remember that a good example can represent many instances of the same or a similar pattern.
• Be specific and informative about what you cannot or are unwilling to change as well. This is far more difficult, but you may need to defend something as fundamental as your research methodology if it is innovative or a detail as small as punctuation patterns in order to represent, say, an early printed book with precision. The point is to find a balance between maintaining the integrity of your research and meeting the needs of the publisher.
• Remember that quickly agreeing to any changes requested by the editor that may be time-consuming but do not compromise your research will render changes you refuse to make exceptional. If you also explain very carefully why those aspects of your work should not be altered, you stand a good chance of convincing the editor that your view is a valid one.
• If you plan to recruit the services of a professional proofreader or editor to help you improve your prose or ensure your conformity with guidelines, it can be useful to mention this. Seeking such help and letting the editor know that you are doing so will be especially productive if there were serious problems with your written English or you find it difficult to understand exactly what the publisher guidelines mean.
