How to Respond to Peer Review Comments: A Step-by-Step Guide

June 2026 · 9 min read · ScholarAI

Key principle: A revision letter is not a defense — it is a demonstration that you took every comment seriously and improved the manuscript accordingly. Reviewers who feel heard and respected are far more likely to recommend acceptance. Every comment deserves a thoughtful response, even if your answer is "we respectfully disagree."

Receiving a "Major Revision" or "Minor Revision" decision is good news — it means your paper has potential. How you respond to reviewer comments determines whether you get accepted or go through another painful round. This guide walks you through the entire revision process, from reading the decision letter to submitting your response.

Understanding the Decision Types

Accept as is: Rare. Paper is published without changes.
Minor revision: Small changes required; typically 1–4 weeks to revise; low rejection risk after revision
Major revision: Substantial changes required; typically 2–3 months; a well-handled major revision often has a reasonable chance of eventual acceptance, though outcomes vary by journal and reviewer
Revise and resubmit: Significant work needed; treated as a new submission; higher uncertainty
Reject with invitation to resubmit: Near-complete rewrite needed; treated as new submission

Step 1: Wait Before You Read

Do not read reviewer comments immediately after receiving them — especially after a major revision or rejection. Wait 24–48 hours. Reviews that feel devastating on day one often look manageable and even helpful on day three. Responding while emotionally reactive produces defensive responses that damage your chances.

Step 2: Structure Your Response Letter

Every response letter should follow this structure:

Opening paragraph thanking the editor and reviewers
Summary of major changes made
Point-by-point response to each reviewer, each comment numbered
For each comment: (a) quote the comment, (b) your response, (c) changes made, (d) page/line reference in revised manuscript

Response Templates

For a comment you fully addressed:

Reviewer 1, Comment 3: "The sample size of 187 seems insufficient for the proposed SEM model."

Response: We thank the reviewer for this important methodological concern. We agree that a larger sample strengthens the model's power. We have added a post-hoc power analysis (G*Power 3.1) confirming that our sample of 187 achieves statistical power of 0.89 for the proposed model (effect size f² = 0.15, α = .05). We have also added a discussion of sample size adequacy in Section 3.3 (page 12, lines 8–14) and acknowledged this as a limitation in Section 5.2.

For a comment you partially addressed:

Response: We appreciate this suggestion and have partially incorporated it. We have added [specific change] in Section X. However, [explain constraint — data availability, scope, etc.]. We acknowledge this as a limitation and have noted it in Section 5 (page X, lines Y–Z).

For a comment you respectfully disagree with:

Response: We thank the reviewer for this perspective. We respectfully suggest that [your argument with evidence/citations]. This approach is consistent with [reference 1] and [reference 2], who [justification]. We have added clarification in Section X (page Y, lines Z–ZZ) to make our rationale explicit.

Handling Conflicting Reviewer Comments

When Reviewer 1 and Reviewer 2 give contradictory advice, acknowledge the conflict explicitly: "We note that Reviewers 1 and 2 offer different perspectives on this point. After careful consideration, we have followed Reviewer 1's suggestion because [reason], and we have added a note in the limitations section acknowledging this debate."

Timeline Management

Minor revision: Submit within 4 weeks maximum — faster is better
Major revision: Most journals give 60–90 days; submit within the deadline; request extension if needed (most editors grant 2–4 week extensions)
Never submit a rushed revision: A poor revision after major review often results in rejection

Prepare Your Manuscript Before First Submission

ScholarAI helps you fix similarity, AI detection, citation, and structure issues before submission — reducing the likelihood of major revision requests.

Analyze My Manuscript Free →