made it past the worst hurdle and not let yourself be put down
by also receiving some criticisms. This kind of letter may seem
tentatively phrased, but it is still an implied contract that if you
do your bit the journal will publish. But you need to close that
contract quickly while it still ‘holds’. Make it a top priority to
meetallof the journal’s conditions for acceptance and to return
the paper in fully revised form within a definite short period,
like three months. When you send it back give the editor a brief
covering letter explaining exactly where and how you have met
her requirements for changes to the text. This ‘refresher’
guidance will simplify her job in giving you a firm acceptance.
If the journal instead gives you a response saying ‘revise,
resubmit and we will referee the new version’, this often seems
very off-putting. The referees’ comments in this case will be
more serious and entail more changes to meet them, and you
may well feel that even if you do a lot more work the publica-
tion prospects are not assured. But it is still worthwhile doing
what the journal asks and kicking back the paper in fully
revised form. Editors who have requested changes may have
been careful not to commit themselves to publish any revised
piece, but they will become morally obligated to you the more
work you do, and the more you tell them about what you have
done in an accompanying letter. If there are some changes you
really cannot accept or cannot make, use your covering letter to
explain why not, in very cool and dispassionate language. Many
editors will give you the benefit of the doubt here, especially
where you have done everything else that they and the referees
asked for. In addition if the editor can see strong signs that you
have changed things to meet the journal’s previous reserva-
tions, she may send your revised paper out to fewer referees
than with the first draft – perhaps only to the most critical ref-
eree last time. So the success rate for resubmissions is actually
much better than for initial submissions. After receiving a
‘rejection’ letter, therefore, be very careful not to withdraw your
paper in a fit of pique, nor to send it anywhere else, until
you are crystal clear that the journal concerned is not going to
publish it.
Even if a journal rejects your paper outright, you should still
look carefully at the referees’ comments and try to work out
why it failed. Again discuss these reactions with your supervisor
248 ◆AUTHORING A PHD