I submitted one Paper to a journal a few months ago. Now I have received the second round of reviewer comments. One reviewer said, "It could be informative to add some stainings of integrin signaling like P-FAK or P-Src and/or TGFb signaling (P-Smad)" Should I add more experiments? My paper topic is about the relationship between one molecular and tissue hardness. It's nothing to do with integrin signaling. If I add some stainings, it means I need to revise paper extensively. Do you think I should conduct the experiment and add in the paper? Is there any other way to respond to the reviewer? Thank you!
Reviewer comments are basically suggestions to improve your manuscript. Whether you incorporate the suggestions and to what extent depends on you. If you strongly disagree with a specific suggestion, you can always choose not to make the suggested change, explaining your reasons for disagreement.
In the case of this request to conduct an additional experiment, do not think about the rework it will involve. Consider whether it will improve the manuscript substantially. You should conduct the experiment only if you feel it will add value to your paper. If you feel it is not relevant and/or will change the focus of your paper, you should not do it.
If you choose not to conduct the experiment, you should explain in your response document that you disagree with this point. Explain why you disagree, backing your argument with strong reasoning or supporting evidence. Make sure your tone is very polite. At the end of the response letter, mention that you are willing to make further changes if required.
- How should I respond if I cannot address a reviewer's suggestion?
- What can I do when I can't agree with the reviewer's comments?
This post first appeared on Educational Resources For Researchers, Authors, Journals On Academic Research, Manuscript Writing, Editing, Proofreading, And Journal Publishing, please read the originial post: here