0

I am new to research and sent my first research article to a journal for publication. Today they sent me a mail saying that my "manuscript has been accepted subject to revision". For your reference, here's the entire mail of the reviews. I am sorry, it's too long.

I have already fixed the referencing and citation issues. My question is, do I have to work on the methodology and literature review as well or are they mere suggestions that I can overlook?

Please help this noob researcher.

"Reviewers comments are attached below which are intended to help you to improve your paper for final publication.

The manuscript has been accepted subject to revisions. Please find the attached comments from the peer reviewers and take the following actions: 1. Review the manuscript according to the reviewers' comments. 2. Provide a response to each of the reviewers' comments in a separate, new and modified Word document. 3. The abstract should be limited to 150-190 words. MLA 8th or APA 7th edition should be followed for referencing. Please rewrite the abstract/ article (if applicable) and send back the complete article in a single WORD file ASAP. Send both the original and the revised manuscripts conforming to the reviewers' comments.

REVIEW 1

  • The study is new, usable, and informative as per the current scenario in today's era.

  • Author/s are advised to format the paper as per the journal template (APA 7).

  • The Paper is good and is recommended for acceptance.

  • Plagiarism – 4% only

  • Title may be modified

To be published this paper:

  • needs to rewrite the Abstract mentioning the findings/result as well

  • To make those unique, all in text citations and work cited are to check with (MLA 8th / ) APA 7th edition required by the Journal

    • in text citations and Works Cited/ References need to be modified/ edited

  • may include researcher's own findings/judgments along with his/her brief critical analysis in the last section of the paper

-the article/paper should be 4000 to 6000 words long

REVIEW 2

STRENGTHS This article is recommended for publication for the following strengths:

  • Research innovation

  • analytical, con/textual, and argumentative discussion throughout ...’

WEAKNESSES

To be published :

  • needs to include recent references from the last 2-10 years/ Literature Review should be enriched

  • To make those unique, all in text citations and References are to (re)check with APA 7th edition as required by the Journal

SUGGESTIONS:

Theoretical framework must be developed

Modify/ update Works Cited / References

REVIEW 3 : AUTHOR: N/A ----------- Overall evaluation ----------- SCORE: 4/5 (Good ), accepted after minor revision. *Resubmit after modification "

Thank you for reading. Your response will be highly appreciated and will contribute to my academic life.

Improve this question
7
  • 4
    My main takeaway from these reviews is that probably the reviewers were not competent to review your paper and probably the journal just wants to take your money while pretending to do peer review.
    – Bryan Krause ♦
    Sep 7 at 22:07
  • What does your advisor say regarding this matter?
    – Jochen Glueck
    Sep 7 at 23:27
  • 4
    @BryanKrause I agree. These do not sound like legitimate peer reviews. They are very vague and nonsensical, and don't refer to anything specific in your manuscript. Reviewer 1 and 2 have a duplicate comment. I would double check that this isn't a predatory or predatory-adjacent journal.
    – MelaGo
    Sep 9 at 5:22
  • @BryanKrause, thank you for your comment. I'll keep it in mind.
    – user164929
    Sep 9 at 6:07
  • 1
    @AbdullahRayhan Those are not good criteria for identifying predatory journals. Well, I'd agree if they didn't have those things they are definitely predatory, but having them does not make them non-predatory.
    – Bryan Krause ♦
    Sep 9 at 14:31

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
4

In general it is necessary and appropriate to consider all reviewer comments, but since they can be wrong it isn't always appropriate to change the manuscript because of them.

But if there are points that you think are incorrect or take you off topic or whatever, let the editor know that you have considered them but decided not to change anything in that instance.

The editor will need to make decisions, of course, but they seem favorably disposed to the paper at the moment. Just do due diligence in reviewing the reviews and considering what changes are appropriate and which are not. The paper is still yours.

Improve this answer
1
  • Thank you for clarifying.
    – user164929
    Sep 9 at 6:09

You must log in to answer this question.