Recently, I have received the reviews of one of my article. One of the reviewer was suggesting to cite more number of articles and make introduction more comprehensive. while the other reviewer is suggesting reduction in number of references, Presently article is having 67 references.
Many a time the opinion of reviewers are conflicting to each other. I welcome your suggestions, how to respond on such conflicting opinions.
Consult the journal editor who deals with your submission or execute what you think is most reasonable in the light of other comments and your own idea of your research and argue it vis-a-vis the reviewer who's recommendation you did not follow by referring to reasons that are content related.
Weird. If the editor has looked at the two referee reports, she would would have noticed that the two reviewers have opposite views on this issue. This is exactly the occasion when the editor needs to step in and provide a verdict on the question. If there is no indication on this issue, then I would write an e-mail to the corresponding editor and explicitly ask for advice: "Shall I reduce the survey, shall it remain as it is, or shall I expand it?"
In the first instance you ask the editor to respond to your view which in your opinion seems to be correct.
67 references are more than enough for any original paper. You do not need to add more references unless the reviewer has suggested some specific papers (mostly his/her own papers). The comments of reviewers will be available to each other once you respond to their comments. Both will withdraw their suggestions.
How to respond when opinion of reviewers are conflicting to each other?
I had similar experience for several times whereby the journal editors didn't "arbitrate" when there were conflicting review remarks. I did as what Michael had stated above in my responses to each reviewer's comment including my view point of justification. At the end my view points / justifications were accepted. I think journal editor might also "intervene" after the author had resubmitted his / her changed manuscript & responses to reviewers' remarks.
That is why some journals use more that 2 referees - for example for Chemical Engineering Journal -5 referees is a standard.
Generally - you don't need to get acceptance of all referees - this is the role of editor - do your best to adress all comments, explain why you don't agree with the reviewer - thats all.
regards,
GB
The editor's knowledge of the subject should be better than the reviewers (this is not always the case). He has to decide whether the comments given by the reviewers are beneficial for improvement of the MS or not.
It's worth considering whether both reviewers might have a point. They may have focused on different points in your article and one point might need more substantiation than the other. If the reviews are detailed enough, you might find that something like this is going on.
Hi,
I agree with Kevin. And I think the journsl editor has a his/her role for considering the acceptation or the rejection of the paper.
I remembered a situation when the author has received two favorable responses but the paper is rejected by the editorial board.
In order to help the editor, you might do like this:
1. Critically assess whether you CAN take away a few articles from the reference list, such that the background material and the most crucial references (such as competitors' papers) are still as complete as they need to be. In the submission statement, let the editor know that you have read your previous reference list, and found some that could be erased. This will show that you are willing to help. Also, add SOME of the suggested new references - those that you know are the most crucial.
2. Further, let the editor also know which references that simply must stay, because of historical connections, and because without a citation to a paper, you would likely need to write even more in the actual text. That balance is hard to get right, but be honest in your correspondence, and you will be ok.
In this case
we have to judge. among two anyone's answer may be very close to the original true. for that you give preference and reply.
The question is whether your citations are duplicative. You may have too many citations in the same topic area, and no citations in another topic area.
Its depends on the man to man. Its your luck the reviewers is positive other wise they suggest you very odd questions
I think that maybe you can increase the references in introduction and reduce the others. By doing so, you will meet all the opinions of reviewers.
(although this is a less mature view)
Substantial number of references can convince other regarding the proof specially different opinions of the reviewers conflicting to each others.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Engineering
- Mechanical Engineering