Major vs Minor Revision: Are You Close to Acceptance?
Major vs minor revision decisions describe the scale of changes a journal expects before its next assessment. A major revision keeps the manuscript under consideration while requiring substantive changes to methods, analysis, evidence, framing, or structure. A minor revision usually involves a narrower set of changes. The exact wording in the editor’s letter sets the manuscript’s status.
Your editor’s letter also lists the revision deadline, resubmission files, and review route. This guide compares both decisions, explains what each means for acceptance, and sets out the steps for preparing your revision.
Check Your Revised Manuscript Before Resubmitting
A journal revision requires consistent changes across the full manuscript. thesify Reviewer evaluates contribution framing, methodological reporting, evidence-to-claim support, section alignment, figures and tables, and title and abstract fit before you resubmit.
Review your revised manuscript.
What Do Major and Minor Revision Decisions Mean?
Major and minor revision labels describe the scale of work an editor expects before reassessing a manuscript. Journals define these labels differently, so the decision letter controls the required changes and next stage. After reviewing the reports and manuscript, the editor issues the formal decision. Reviewer recommendations inform that decision.
What Major Revision Means in a Journal Decision
A major revision usually requires substantive changes before resubmission. These may involve methods, analysis, evidence, contribution framing, section alignment, or figures and tables. The editor assesses the revised manuscript before issuing another decision.
What Minor Revision Means in a Journal Decision
A minor revision usually involves focused changes, such as clarifying a passage, correcting an error, updating a citation, or fixing a figure label. The editor may assess the revision directly or seek further reviewer input. Both decisions require you to respond to reviewer comments and document each change.
Major vs Minor Revision: Key Differences at a Glance
Major and minor revisions differ in scope, review route, and editorial status. Use your decision letter to confirm the required work and next stage.
Comparison point | Major revision | Minor revision |
Scale of change | Substantive changes across core areas | Narrower, specific changes |
Common requests | Methods, analysis, evidence, framing, structure, figures, or tables | Clarifications, reporting details, citations, labels, or captions |
New analysis or experiments | May be requested | Less common; follow the decision letter |
Structural changes | May affect several sections | Usually local and focused |
Re-review route | Often returned to reviewers, depending on journal procedures. | Often editor-assessed; reviewer input may follow |
Response document | Follow the journal’s instructions; a point-by-point response is commonly required | Follow the journal’s instructions; a point-by-point response is commonly required |
Editorial status | Active revision before another decision | Active revision before the editor confirms the outcome |
Acceptance signal | Further assessment follows the revised submission | Fewer concerns usually remain; editor approval confirms acceptance |
Source note: Publisher practices vary. This comparison reflects guidance from IOP Publishing, SAGE’s decision guidance, and Springer Nature's Discover journal policy. Follow your journal’s decision letter.
What a Major Revision Usually Requires
Methodological and Analytical Changes
Some decisions call for new experiments or data when the existing evidence cannot resolve a central concern. Others require a better explanation or analysis of the material already collected. Check every change across the Methods, Results, and conclusions so each section reports the same design, evidence, and interpretation.
Contribution, Structure, and Presentation Changes
Substantive revision can also reshape the manuscript’s argument and presentation. You may need to narrow unsupported claims, state the contribution more precisely, reorganize sections, or revise figures and tables. Align the title, abstract, introduction, results, and discussion around the revised evidence and contribution. Methods, Results, and Discussion feedback can help you identify remaining gaps between connected sections before resubmission.
What a Minor Revision Usually Requires
Clarifications and Limited Reporting Changes
A minor revision usually requires focused clarifications or limited reporting changes. You may need to define a term, clarify an interpretation, add supporting information, address a small reporting gap, update a reference when newer or more relevant evidence justifies it, or make a specific change requested by the editor or reviewer. Each request still requires a clear manuscript change or a reasoned response.
Figures, Citations, and Targeted Corrections
Targeted corrections may involve figure labels, captions, citations, references, numbers, or factual statements. Correct the identified issue, record where you made the change, and check the connected passage for consistency. Keep the revision focused on the editor’s and reviewers’ requests while checking any directly affected text, table, or figure.
What to Do After a Major or Minor Revision Decision
Use this sequence after either decision to plan the manuscript revision and response to reviewers. Adjust the depth of each step to the comments in your decision letter.
Read the documents separately. Start with the editor’s decision letter. Then review each report so the editor’s priorities remain distinct from individual reviewer recommendations.
Confirm the deadline and required files. Record the journal revision deadline, portal requirements, manuscript format, response document, supplementary files, and any clean or tracked versions.
Organize every comment. Group requests by manuscript section and label them methodological, evidential, structural, reporting, figure, or citation issues.
Prioritize substantive concerns. Address requests affecting methods, analysis, evidence, claims, contribution framing, or section alignment before localized corrections.
Revise the manuscript first. Make connected changes across the abstract, main text, figures, tables, and supplements. Record page and line locations as you work.
Prepare a point-by-point response. As you respond to reviewer comments, summarize each request, describe your action, and give the revision’s location. Provide an evidence-based rationale for any disagreement.
Run a consistency check. Compare the revised manuscript, response document, and tracked version. Confirm that every reported change appears in the manuscript and that connected sections agree. A pre-submission review can identify remaining gaps before upload.
Resubmit the complete package. Upload every required file in the journal’s requested format. Verify filenames and versions, then review the submission proof before finalizing.
Does Major or Minor Revision Mean Your Paper Will Be Accepted?
Major and minor revision labels indicate a manuscript’s editorial status. The decision letter sets the conditions for the journal’s next decision.
Does Major Revision Mean Rejection?
A major revision usually keeps the manuscript under active consideration. The journal is willing to assess a substantially revised version after substantive concerns are addressed. Acceptance depends on how fully the revision resolves those concerns. The editor then issues another decision.
Does Minor Revision Mean Acceptance?
Read the exact wording in your decision letter. A minor revision usually means the editor expects a limited set of changes before deciding the outcome. Sage guidance on minor revisions states that acceptance follows after the editor is satisfied with the changes. Some journals use “accept with minor revisions,” while others issue a separate “minor revision” decision.
Can a Paper Be Rejected After Minor Revision?
Yes. For example, Taylor & Francis states that a revised manuscript may be rejected when the changes are inadequate. Rejection can follow when required changes are omitted or central concerns remain unresolved. Address each request, explain any reasoned disagreement, and verify that the response document matches the manuscript.
Common Mistakes After a Journal Revision Decision
Use this checklist when preparing a revised manuscript and response to reviewer comments after a journal revision decision.
Treating minor comments as optional. Address every comment and record the action taken.
Replying defensively. Explain what you changed or support a reasoned disagreement with evidence.
Omitting change locations. Give page, section, paragraph, table, or figure references for every revision.
Claiming a change that is missing from the manuscript. Match every statement in the response document to a visible manuscript update.
Editing one section in isolation. Check connected claims across the abstract, Methods, Results, Discussion, figures, and tables.
Missing the editor’s priorities. Use the editor’s decision letter to set the order and scope of revisions.
Assuming acceptance. Treat both revision labels as decisions requiring a complete response.
Major vs Minor Revision FAQs
How Long Do You Have to Submit a Journal Revision?
Journal revision deadlines vary by journal and decision. Use the date in your decision letter or submission portal. If substantial analysis, experiments, or coauthor work requires more time, contact the editorial office early and request an extension.
Does a Major Revision Usually Go Back to Reviewers?
Often, but journal practice varies. For example, Springer Nature’s Discover journals usually return major revisions to the original reviewers. Check your decision letter or journal guidance for the route that applies to your manuscript.
Can You Disagree With a Reviewer Request?
Yes. State your reasoning respectfully, support it with evidence, and explain how you addressed the underlying concern. If you made an alternative change, identify it and give its location. A clear response helps the editor evaluate your decision.
Can a Journal Request Another Revision Round?
Yes. After reviewing the revised submission, the editor may request another major or minor revision, accept the manuscript, or reject it. The submission guidelines for Advances in Computational Mathematics list further revision, acceptance, and rejection as possible outcomes after revision.
What if the Journal Uses Different Decision Labels?
Read the full decision letter and author instructions. Labels such as “major amendments,” “moderate revision,” and “accept with minor revisions” may represent different levels of work, deadlines, review routes, and editorial status across journals.
Related Resources
New section‑level feedback for methods, results & discussion: Recent developments highlight growing interest in AI‑based pre‑submission feedback. Learn how thesify’s new section‑level feedback flags missing endpoints, incomplete statistics and overclaims, helping you revise methods, results and discussion before submission.
How to Respond to Reviewers’ Comments on Your Journal Manuscript: A well‑structured response letter that addresses every comment, provides evidence of revisions, and maintains a professional tone signals to editors and reviewers that you are committed to producing high‑quality research. With practice and the help of resources like this guide, your responses will become more efficient and effective, paving the way for successful publication.
Can You Resubmit a Rejected Paper? What to Do Next: Your post-rejection decision guide. A journal rejection closes one editorial process. It does not make the research unpublishable or prevent you from submitting the manuscript elsewhere. Find out when you can resubmit a rejected paper to the same journal, when to try a new journal, how appeals work, and what to revise before submission.
