Hello. I don't have any experience of this so would really appreciate some expert advice! I submitted an article for publication a year ago and have just had a response. They have sent me the editorial guidelines to use to revise my article along with the results from two blind peer reviews. The problem is that the peer reviews seem to say completely different things e.g. one says "major revisions needed", the other "accept unrevised". One says "inadequate structure", the other "excellent structure". Should I ask for clarification or just go with the easy option?
Please or to access all these features
Please
or
to access all these features
Academic common room
Revising for a journal - not sure what I am meant to do!
10 replies
Sometimesonly · 09/04/2021 17:00
OP posts:
Please create an account
To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.