Publishing your thesis

We do great work in our lab group, and we expect to have that work published during, or soon after your time in the lab group. Here are some checklists for getting your awesome work published. You can print this out, and check through it, or save a version on your computer.

Preparing for your submission

• Add line numbers to your thesis, to ensure that each line is numbered in order starting on the first page.

• High quality figures, preferably as vector graphics (eps or pdf).

• A cover letter outlining the impact of your work, describing who would be interested in it, and highlighting the major outcomes.
• Be patient. Review is likely to take 3-6 months.

Revising your submission

• Great! The reviews are back! Forward to all co-authors.

• Leave the submitted version as it is and copy it into a new version that will be the revision. At the end of the process, we’ll compare the two versions and make that the “tracked changes version”, highlighting all changes since the initial submission.

• Review all the comments relatively quickly first. Come up with a short list of more significant comments that are going to require more significant work and head scratching. Spend some time thinking about the plan of action to respond to these comments, then send to Tim (and maybe also co-authors, depending on how engaged the co-authors are) for discussion and strategizing.

• Copy all of the comments from the editors and three reviewers into a single word document called “response to reviews.” Color every single comment blue, reduce the font size by a point, and use a sans serif font like arial or helvetica. For your response, use black, serif (Times New Roman) font of a normal font size. Describe this definition scheme at the top of the response to reviews, with text such as:

"We thank the reviewer and editor for their thoughtful, careful, and constructive reviews. We address each of their comments in the document below, in which the original reviewer comments are in blue, sans serif font, and our responses to each comment are in black, serif font."

An example response to reviews document is here, that stemmed from reviews of Bartholomaus et al., 2015; you can use this as a template. The response to reviews should be written in “business formal letter” language, that is respectful, appreciative, and kind. As though you are applying for a job. Even nasty, hard-to-deal-with comments should be responded to with, “The reviewer raises an important and thoughtful point, and we thank the reviewer for their critique. In response to this point we have …”

Short responses to very short comments, like typos, can be effective after the formal tone has been established (i.e., “Done”).

• In the Revised document, “track changes” in Word for each change you make, and, simultaneously, fill in the Response to Reviews document, describing each change and how it responds to the reviewer comment. Put in “comments” to spark discussion with co-authors, and/or ask questions.

• Forward the Revision and Response to Reviews files to co-authors for edits/feedback.

• Craft a new Cover Letter, again in formal language, reiterating the impact and major conclusions of your paper, and also allocating a couple of sentences to each of the major changes you’ve made. Thank the editor and the reviewers for their time.

• When all the co-authors give the okay, re-submit! Thanks for your hard work and pushing this through to completion!

---