Skip to main content

Unfortunately we don't fully support your browser. If you have the option to, please upgrade to a newer version or use Mozilla Firefox, Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome, or Safari 14 or newer. If you are unable to, and need support, please send us your feedback.

We'd appreciate your feedback.Tell us what you think!

Elsevier
Publish with us

Peer review and resubmission: How to respond effectively

Navigate peer review feedback to strengthen your manuscript and increase your chances of acceptance.

Colourful accordion of various images

Understanding the peer review and resubmission process

Peer review is designed to ensure the quality and integrity of the scholarly record. Independent reviewers — academics or professionals with expertise in your field — provide an unbiased assessment of your manuscript to evaluate whether the research is original, methodologically sound and communicated with clarity.

Reviewer feedback enables you to refine your work and strengthen your manuscript.

The three key areas of peer review and resubmission are outlined below, with links to our resources.

The purpose of peer review

The peer review process benefits both authors and the broader research community. It enables authors to publish with confidence by offering constructive insights that help sharpen arguments, highlight limitations and strengthen presentation. For the community, it builds trust and ensures that published findings meet rigorous academic standards of integrity, accuracy and reproducibility.

Understanding that peer review aims to improve rather than criticize your work helps frame feedback constructively.

Responding to reviewers’ comments

Effective response to reviewer feedback requires clear, professional and constructive communication.

When addressing comments, remain polite, objective and evidence-based. If you disagree with a reviewer’s assessment, explain your reasoning respectfully while providing supporting evidence. Sometimes feedback from reviewers highlights areas where the writing could be clearer — consider whether additional explanation or restructuring might improve understanding.

Handle differing reviewer opinions by addressing each perspective individually. Explain your reasoning for choosing one approach over another, potentially incorporating elements from both viewpoints where feasible.

Resubmitting your paper

Before submitting your revision, review the decision letter and any file attachments to make sure everything is accurate.

You can monitor your resubmission status, but bear in mind that processing times vary depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of revisions.

After resubmission, the editor may send your manuscript back to the original reviewers for re-evaluation, or they may assess the changes directly. This step depends on the extent of revisions required. The outcome may be acceptance, another round of revision, transfer to another journal or, in some cases, rejection.

Remember, multiple revision rounds are common. Each one is an opportunity to make your manuscript more robust and ensures it meets the highest standards of academic integrity.

Frequently asked questions

Resubmission support

Summary

Peer review is a vital stage that strengthens your research, enhances its clarity, and ensures content integrity, accuracy and reproducibility. By engaging constructively with reviewer feedback, preparing a well-structured response and resubmitting carefully revised work, you take a decisive step toward publication success.

Once you’ve completed this stage of the publication journey, you’re ready to move on to the next: Proofing and publication.