When you submit an article to an academic journal, there are several possible responses. One is being asked to revise and resubmit your paper based on the reviewer feedback. But how should you approach revising and resubmitting a journal article? We have a few tips academic writers can follow:\n\n \tRead the review feedback and take some time to absorb it.\n \tOrganize the feedback and plan your revisions.\n \tWork through the revisions to redraft your article.\n \tDraft a polite response letter to accompany your revised article.\n \tGet your revisions proofread to maximize chances of success.\n\nFor more on how to revise and resubmit an article, check out our guide below.\n1. Read the Feedback, Then Take a Break\nWhen you receive a response to your initial submission, you will typically get:\n\n \tA letter from an editor covering general feedback and areas of improvement. This should guide the overall direction of your revisions.\n \tDetailed comments from reviewers addressing specific parts of your paper.\n\nRead these carefully to get a general sense of the changes being suggested.\n\nIf the feedback seems harsh, remember that being asked to revise and resubmit is a good thing! The review process is simply an opportunity to refine your paper or to refocus on the part of your work most relevant to the journal.\n\nAs such, keep the deadline in mind, but consider taking a few days to absorb what the reviewers have said before planning your responses. That way, when you come to address it, you can be sure you\u2019re responding objectively.\n2. Plan Your Responses\nWhen you\u2019re ready, plan your responses. We\u2019d suggest creating a spreadsheet to organize things at this stage. You can then create four columns as follows:\n\n \tReviewer \u2013 In this column, note who left each piece of feedback.\n \tComments \u2013 Copy the feedback itself into the second column. This could be anything from a minor spelling correction to a request to expand upon parts of your argument. For general feedback from the editor, break it down in terms of specific parts of your paper that you\u2019ll need to revise. If two reviewers comment on the same thing, include both sets of comments.\n \tResponses \u2013 This is where you will plan your revisions in response to each point of feedback. Give yourself clear instructions for what you need to do and exactly which part(s) of your paper you need to revise to address the issue.\n \tStatus \u2013 Use this to record where you are in the revision process for each issue (e.g., to mark each revision as "Pending" or "Complete").\n\nMake sure you respond to all of the reviewers\u2019 comments. If there are a lot, you might also want to group them by section. For instance, you could put all the comments about the introduction into one sheet in your spreadsheet, all comments about the literature review in another sheet, and so on.\n\nKeep in mind that, if you disagree with something a reviewer said, you do not have to make a revision. But you should still note your reasons for disagreeing in your spreadsheet. You can then use this to justify your decisions in your response letter.\n3. Redraft Your Paper\nOnce you have a plan, put it into action! This means working through your list of reviewer comments, then revising your paper to address the issues raised.\n\nHow you do this is up to you. You could work through the revisions in order, starting with the introduction and ending with the conclusion. Or you could start with the simpler revisions if you want to ease yourself into the process.\n\nIn either case, update the status column in your spreadsheet as you work through the changes. And make sure to follow the publisher\u2019s guidelines for marking up revisions in your paper (e.g., whether to track changes or create a list of revisions).\n4. Write a Response Letter\nAs well as your revised paper, most journals will require a response letter. Start this by thanking the editor and reviewers for their time (it's only polite).\n\nHowever, the majority of this letter will be a point-by-point explanation of the changes you\u2019ve made in the revised version of your paper. To do this:\n\n \tNote each major point of feedback, quoting what the reviewer said verbatim.\n \tFollow each point with an explanation of the revisions you\u2019ve made to address the issues raised. Where relevant, make sure to include page, paragraph, and line numbers for the changes you discuss to help the reader(s) find them.\n\nIf you choose not to make any of the suggested changes \u2013 or if you got contradictory feedback from reviewers and need to pick just one suggestion to implement \u2013 include the reasoning for your decision in this list.\n5. Perform Final Checks\nBefore resubmitting your article, there are a few things you should check:\n\n \tHave you responded to all the feedback? Go back to the initial reviewer comments and make sure you\u2019re addressed them all somewhere, either by making the necessary revisions in the paper or in the letter of response.\n \tDo the revisions fit with the rest of the paper? Make sure any revised or new material fits neatly with the text remaining from the original version.\n \tAre your paper and letter of response error free? Errors or inconsistencies could undermine your hard work, so make sure to check your writing.\n\nOur expert editors can help with that final point. To try Proofed\u2019s academic proofreading services for free, submit a trial document today.