I’ve been talking about “What Do Editors Mean When They Say….” This week let’s focus on more detailed comments they could make about your manuscript and how you might want to react. The editor’s comments will be in italics.
I think if you moved X and Y around, that the reader would be more likely to follow your meaning. This is fairly straightforward—or so it can seem. The editor is strongly urging you to reconstruct how you are telling the story of your research. It might be as simple as moving the section on ethical concerns to after the methods section, instead of before it, because knowing what you did will help the reader to “see” possible ethics concerns. It could be something more substantial, like the order in which you shared your results with readers. Often there is a logic to the data—one result flows from another—but authors sometimes are so involved in their research that they find it hard to see how changing the order could make things easier on the readers. For example, in the social sciences, the first tables usually convey the demographics of the sample. To have those at the end of the results section would feel unsettled. So expect that an editor might ask you to reorder the results section.
Even in the most quantitative of manuscripts, you—the author—are telling a story. While we all like a good plot twist, most stories–especially those which are shared in an academic journal– unfold in a relatively predictable manner. Each journal has a pattern that the typical story is told—you can find it by reading several published articles. Fitting your story into the journal’s pattern, will absolutely increase your chance of publication.
But…what if you don’t agree with the editor’s suggestion about reordering the manuscript? If this is the case, you will need to try persuading the editor. Make a strong case—focusing on how your way will be beneficial for readers who are trying to understand your story. I suggest doing it in a timely letter to the editor, laying out your argument in calm, measured language. But recognize that there is always is a risk that the editor might decide to rescind an offer to publish, if you and the editor are far apart on a major issue.
The editor wants what I consider to be picky grammar or style changes. Do I have to do those, too? I get it, I do. I was surprised at how many authors swore to me that their manuscript followed the American Sociological Style (used by the journal I edited) and it wasn’t even close to the style. So here I will side with the editor. She or he knows the style likely better than you do, so I would make these changes—especially if they are in the references or in-text citations.
Also I hope that you have learned your “grammatical trip wires.” I know mine (‘that’ versus ‘which’) and I will always listen when someone tells me that I have them backwards. Can you welcome another set of “grammar eyes” on your manuscript? Try to, it can really help to make your thoughts clearer and more precise.
I realize that some authors will listen to the editor about grammar issues but fight the copyeditor. I never have understood why; it felt to me a bit like a status issue (editor higher status/copy editor lower status) but that’s just a guess.
Again, if you feel strongly about something, say so. But what is very important is how you frame your feelings and words. Don’t berate, don’t do the equivalent of shouting, etc. State your issue calmly and rationally. Build an argument for why you feel the text should remain the same—you want them to listen and consider your request, after all. If you don’t, expect the editor and especially the copy editor, to make the changes as they see fit.
Listen to what the editor doesn’t say just as much as what the editor does. What do I mean? If I somewhat disagreed with “Reviewer 2”, I would just not discuss his or her comments in my letter to the author. However, if I disagreed vehemently (as in, I didn’t want the author to listen to that Reviewer) then I would say so in my letter. So read into the silences just as much as the words. Why do editors do this? My journal required that all reviewers get copies not just of the other reviews, but also my decision letters. That meant that reviewers could see my thoughts on their comments and I also wrote some personally if I felt that their comments were beyond the pale. I made the decision not to use those few reviewers ever again as well.
I know that it can be hard to “let a manuscript go” into the hands of editors, reviewers, copy editors, and eventually, readers. I have been there—I have trouble sometimes even having my husband read my words! In fact, we cannot be in the same room when he line edits for me—I’ll want to know what word he wants to change, etc. Talk with, write to your editor if you have questions. But I believe that most editors really want to have each manuscript tell its story in the best way possible and want you to succeed.
Please visit the Pedagogical Thoughts website to contact me about institutional or individual consulting, dissertation editing or coaching about writing.
Pedagogical Thoughts 