In revising manuscript with reference to reviewer's comments, is it right or mandatory to accept all the recommendations of reviewer? Are they always correct and right? If not, then how is it possible to address wrong views of such reviewer?
Hi Dear Colleagues
In revising manuscript with reference to reviewer's comments, is it right or mandatory to accept all the recommendations of reviewer?
It depends on Reviewers, In general it isn't optional nor mandatory, try to be diplomat! :-)
to Are they always correct and right?
No at all, they are human, they can miss the point of the paper (lack of expertise in this specific domain), how ever it is good and it depends on their mode :-)
If not, then how is it possible to address wrong views of such reviewer?
You don't have, be diplomat!, if not, you have to be aware to expect a human response: positive or negative behaviors (extreme or moderate ones) !!!!
Sincerely, Djamel.
Are authors always correct? No, absolutely not. Most papers todays are summaries of printouts of statistical software calculations, such as SPSS, EVIEW, LISREL, ETC. In social science, where mathematical or statistical knowledge of authors may be limited, this is really a problem in the publication world.
Are reviewers always right? A good journal is reviewed by more than one readers. The authors should compare the comments of two reviewers, if they are consistent, then the author should stop and think over. If the two reviewers have inconsistent comments then may be you have found something new worthy of pursuing.
If the journal has one reviewer, you should move on to different journals who have better resources and expertise.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Philology
- Classical Philology
- Manuscripts