SearchMy accountHelpBasket0 items

For authors

Reviewing a revision

Decorative banner with text reading 'early career researcher hub'

If a manuscript that you’ve reviewed is sent back to the authors to revise and resubmit, the editor will often ask you to comment on the revision as well. You're not obliged to review a revision, but you will be the best placed person to check the updated manuscript, so editors are likely to contact you in the first instance. For the most part, you’ll find that reviewing a revision is very similar to reviewing an original submission. There are some things to think about when reviewing a revision though:

  • Re-read your original review: before you dive into the revision, go back and read your original review and any other notes that you may have made. It’s probably been at least a few months since you looked at this paper, so this should help to refresh your memory. It will also help to remind you what you asked for from the authors and what you were hoping they would do to change their paper.
  • Read the author’s response: when you receive a revised manuscript, it will generally come with a response from the author to the reviews that their original paper received. This should give you some information on how the authors have edited their paper in light of your suggestions. They may not have taken all of your recommendations on board, but, if so, there should be an explanation of why they’ve decided not to make the updates. Reading the response from the authors first will help to set your expectations for what the new manuscript will look like.
  • Focus on how your requests for the manuscript were addressed: when you start reviewing the revision, try to keep your original requests in mind. Your new review should almost exclusively focus on how well the authors have taken in your comments and integrated them into their work. Try to keep any new suggestions or requests to a minimum. Unless new errors, inconsistencies or problems have been introduced in the revised version, you don’t need to give new suggestions.
  • Don’t be afraid of writing a brief, positive review: as the editors have already read your comments on the manuscript as a whole, you can be quite brief in your comments if you’re giving a positive review. The aim of a revision review isn’t so much to assess the manuscript as it is to assess how well the changes have addressed the issues raised in the first round of review. Saying ‘all of my suggestions have been adequately addressed’ is perfectly acceptable at this stage – if that’s the case, that’s all the editor needs to know. If you think that further revisions are needed though, you should follow the advice in the Writing your review section.

Where to now?

Reviewing a revision | Edinburgh University Press