12

I am a reviewer for a paper that has undergone three revision and resubmit stages - the paper has greatly improved - and the authors have made great efforts to address all the comments they received from fellow reviewers and me. I have nothing more to say about it than "is all good for me".

I've never been through so many revisions as a reviewer - what would be the etiquette here? Should I praise the paper again, explaining its strengths, as it would be my first review? Could I say "the authors satisfactorily addressed all comments"?

Improve this question
0

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
16

In general "My concerns have been addressed" or "I believe this is now ready for publication" is enough.

If I really like the revised paper but one of the other reviewers still seems obstreperous, I sometimes include a very brief note addressing their major concerns: "Specifically, the new data provide ample support for {claim} and I believe no additional experiments are needed", "Related work on {topic} is now thoroughly discussed in the text", etc. It's not necessary to repeat a long analysis of the paper's strength; "As I wrote previously, this will be a valuable contribution to the literature" is fine.

If the authors gone above and beyond to address something, you could also add a thank you or bit of praise. I doubt this affects the editorial process, but it can be nice for the authors to have their hard work acknowledged; I certainly appreciate it!

Improve this answer
11

It is enough to recommend to the editor that the paper is now ready for publication, that issues have been satisfactorily addressed, and that you recommend publication. You don't need to go beyond that and there is no reason to make the editor read more than necessary for a decision.

Improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .