Draft and organize response letters for revised journal submissions. Address each editor and referee comment, link responses to manuscript changes, explain disagreements with evidence, and check that every comment has been covered.
Structure responses to referee reports for R&R submissions
Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.
Help structure and draft responses to referee reports. Ensures consistent formatting and comprehensive responses.
RESPONSE TO REFEREE COMMENTS
Paper: [Title]
Authors: [Names]
Journal: [Journal Name]
Manuscript #: [Number]
Date: [Date]
We thank the editor and referees for their constructive comments.
We have carefully addressed all points raised. Below we provide
point-by-point responses. Referee comments are in italics, and
our responses follow in regular text. All page and line numbers
refer to the revised manuscript.
================================================================
RESPONSE TO EDITOR
================================================================
[Editor comments and responses]
================================================================
RESPONSE TO REFEREE 1
================================================================
[Point-by-point responses]
================================================================
RESPONSE TO REFEREE 2
================================================================
[Point-by-point responses]
For each referee comment:
----------------------------------------------------------------
Comment 1.X: [Brief label for reference]
----------------------------------------------------------------
*[Paste exact referee comment in italics]*
RESPONSE:
[Your response here]
- What we did to address the comment
- Where changes appear in the manuscript (page X, lines Y-Z)
- If we added analysis, summarize the results
- If we respectfully disagree, explain why with evidence
CHANGES MADE:
- Page X: [Description of change]
- Table Y: [Description of new/modified table]
- Section Z: [Description of new text]
The referee raises an important point about [issue]. We have:
1. [Addressed concern directly]
2. Added robustness tests in Table X showing results hold when [alternative]
3. Discussed this limitation on page Y, lines Z
We appreciate this comment on identification. We address this in three ways:
1. Added [placebo test/IV/etc.] in Table X
2. Discussed the assumption more carefully in Section Y
3. Acknowledge remaining limitations on page Z
Thank you for this suggestion. We have added [analysis] in Table X / Figure Y.
The results show [brief summary]. This [strengthens/qualifies] our main findings.
We apologize for the lack of clarity. We have revised the text on page X
to clarify that [explanation]. The revised passage now reads:
"[Quote revised text]"
We appreciate this thoughtful comment. After careful consideration, we
respectfully maintain our original approach because:
1. [Reason 1 with evidence/citation]
2. [Reason 2]
However, we have added discussion of this alternative perspective on page X
and include [robustness test] in the appendix to address related concerns.
Include at the end of your response:
================================================================
SUMMARY OF MAJOR CHANGES
================================================================
1. Added Table X: [Description]
2. Added Figure Y: [Description]
3. Revised Section Z to [description]
4. Added robustness tests for [list]
5. Expanded discussion of [topic] on pages A-B
================================================================
SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS ADDED
================================================================
- Online Appendix Table A1: [Description]
- Online Appendix Figure A1: [Description]
- Replication package updated with [additions]
Do:
Don't:
Agreeing:
Partial agreement:
Respectful disagreement:
Acknowledging limitations:
Before submitting your response:
No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.
No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.
No comments yet. Be the first to write one.
Turn a broad research idea into clear, testable questions. Compare familiar and less conventional approaches, structure the selected question around its population and methods, and assess variables, feasibility, and potential theoretical contributions.
Helps build a research framework by comparing theories, mapping relationships between variables, and deriving testable hypotheses. Explores less conventional options, examines weaknesses and competing explanations, and produces diagrams with anticipated reviewer objections.
Clarify the philosophical assumptions behind a research project and check whether they fit the proposed methods. Get a reasoned research stance, draft proposal wording, and guidance for explaining how the researcher's background and values shape the study.
Plan and draft academic papers through specialized agent roles covering literature, arguments, citations, and review. Get chapter guidance, revision roadmaps, Traditional Chinese and English abstracts, and documents formatted as LaTeX, DOCX, PDF, or Markdown.
Turn a detailed outline into a philosophy or interdisciplinary manuscript. Draft chapters with repeated quality reviews, check terminology and arguments across sections, and prepare the manuscript, evaluation reports, abstract, and metadata for submission.
Simulate academic peer review through five reviewer roles tailored to the paper's field. Receive separate critiques, an editorial decision, and a prioritized revision roadmap, or check whether a revised manuscript addresses earlier comments.