how do you write a cover letter for resubmission

• Research Process
• Manuscript Preparation
• Manuscript Review
• Publication Process
• Publication Recognition
• Language Editing Services
• Translation Services

How to Write a Cover Letter for Your Manuscript? Here are the Tips and Examples

• 3 minute read

Table of Contents

A cover letter is often the first thing an editor reads when reviewing your submission. As your first pitch to the editor, the cover letter helps them gauge the suitability of your manuscript for publication in their journal. Imagine your work shaping the future of your field, gathering citations, and sparking discussions. A powerful cover letter is thus the first step to making that vision into a reality.   

In this article, we will guide you through the process of writing an effective cover letter and explain how you can get it right every time with examples. First, let us get started with the basics!  

Getting the Basics Right  

When writing a cover letter, it is crucial to address the editor by their correct and complete name¹ . If there are multiple co-editors, you can address your letter to the right person, based on their specialization or designated responsibilities. If unsure, it is okay to go with a more general salutation, such as “Dear Editors”¹ .   

Presenting your Research  

Provide a clear and concise title for your submission and specify whether it is an article, communication, review, perspective, or a manuscript belonging to some other category. If the journal guideline recommends, consider including a list of all authors in the manuscript.   

After covering the preliminary information, briefly explain your paper’s central theme or focus to give the editor an idea of its contents. Ensure this stays a brief outline, without going into too much detail.   

Conveying the Importance of Your Work  

How you communicate the impact of your work can make or break your cover letter. To make a strong impression on the editor, articulate the significance of your research clearly, emphasizing its relevance to the field. Additionally, show how your work aligns with the journal’s scope and mission.  

Including a Formal Declaration  

Some journals require a set of declarations from you to ensure that your manuscript adheres to its ethical code and the larger ethical standards of scientific publishing. Here are the required declarations in a cover letter:  

• Originality of work:  
• Confirm that your work is original and has not been published elsewhere. This tells the editor your research is unique.  
• Conflict of interest statement:  
• Be clear about any potential conflicts of interest. This includes any personal, financial, or professional connections that might affect your research.  
• Funding source (if applicable):  
• Tell where your research funding came from, if any. This includes any support or grants from organizations.   

Including Personal Suggestions for Reviewers on a Separate Page (optional)  

If there is no part of the submission process that collects researcher suggestions for reviewers, and there are special requests from the researcher for reviewers (e.g., recommending the inclusion or suggesting the exclusion of a specific reviewer, etc.), you may also make a note about this in the cover letter.  

Combining these five points, here is a good example of a cover letter for researchers’ reference:  

(This image is intended to demonstrate the norms of formatting and tone of expression in a cover letter, it is to be used only by the researcher as a reference in writing² .)  

Conclusion  

A strong cover letter can go a long way in ensuring success for researchers looking to publish their manuscripts! Your cover letter is the opening act, setting the stage for how editors perceive your manuscript. So, look at it not as just another formality but as a crucial opportunity to make a strong impression.   

Understanding what to include, what is optional, and what is best left unsaid can be tricky. That is where our team of experts at Elsevier Language Services can step in. We will provide personalized recommendations and expert guidance to help you craft a cover letter that perfectly complements your manuscript. Reach out to us today to make a great first impression and embark on a successful academic journey!  

Reference  

• Nicholas, D. (2019). How to choose a journal and write a cover letter. Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia, 13(5), 35. https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.sja_691_18  
• Loyola University Chicago. (n.d.). JCSHESA Sample Cover Letter. https://ecommons.luc.edu/jcshesa/cover_letter_template.pdf  

Page-Turner Articles are More Than Just Good Arguments: Be Mindful of Tone and Structure!

You may also like.

Publishing Biomedical Research: What Rules Should You Follow?

Writing an Effective Cover Letter for Manuscript Resubmission

Journal Acceptance Rates: Everything You Need to Know

Research Data Storage and Retention

How to Find and Select Reviewers for Journal Articles

How to Request the Addition of an Extra Author Before Publication

Paper Rejection: Common Reasons

How to Write a Journal Article from a Thesis

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

How to write a cover letter for journal submission

Download our cover letter template.

When you submit your article to a journal, you often need to include a cover letter. This is a great opportunity to highlight to the journal editor what makes your research new and important. The cover letter should explain why your work is perfect for their journal and why it will be of interest to the journal’s readers.

When writing for publication, a well-written cover letter can help your paper reach the next stage of the manuscript submission process – being sent out for  peer review . So it’s worth spending time thinking about how to write a cover letter to the journal editor, to make sure it’s going to be effective.

To help you, we’ve put together a guide to explain how to write a cover letter for journal article submission. You will receive cover letter instructions of what you should include and what you shouldn’t, and a word template cover letter.

Ready to submit?

Taylor & Francis Editing services has a high quality premium editing package to make you feel confident to submit.

Customized cover letter

Feedback on original writing

Complete language check

Extensive revisions.

What should my cover letter include?

Before you start to write, please check the  instructions for authors  (IFAs) of your chosen journal, as not all journals will require one. You should also check the IFAs for any journal specific information on what to include. This may include a list of relevant articles written by you or your co-authors that have been or are currently being considered for publication in other journals.

Key points to include in your letter to the editor:

Editor’s name (you can usually find this on the journal page on  Taylor & Francis Online ).

Your manuscript’s title.

Name of the journal you are submitting to.

Statement that your paper has not been previously published and is not currently under consideration by another journal.

Brief description of the research you are reporting in your paper, why it is important, and why you think the readers of the journal would be interested in it.

Contact information for you and any  co-authors .

Confirmation that you have no  competing interests  to disclose.

Things to avoid:

Don’t copy your abstract into your cover letter, instead explain in your own words the significance of the work, the problem that is being addressed, and why the manuscript belongs in the journal.

Don’t use too much jargon or too many acronyms, keep language straightforward and easy to read.

Avoid too much detail – keep your cover letter to a maximum of one page, as an introduction and brief overview.

Avoid any spelling and grammar errors and ensure your letter is thoroughly proofed before submitting.

Click to enlarge your PDF on key information to include in your cover letter .

Cover letter template

If you need further help to write a cover letter for a journal, you can download and use our sample template as a guide.

You might find that the submission system for your chosen journal requires your cover letter to be submitted into a text box rather than as a separate document, but it is still a good idea to write a draft first to make sure you have included everything.

Always make sure to check the journal’s  instructions for authors  for any specific additional information to include.

Submission ready

Use our submission checklist  to make sure you’ve included everything you need to.

If you need more guidance, take a look at our other  information and resources to help you make your submission .

Rapid constructive feedback

Consider the Taylor & Francis Rapid Technical Review service to help you meet your deadline, through peer-review-like comments on your manuscript.

Related resources

Journal submission support

Guide to improve your submission experience

Article submission checklist

Publishing tips, direct to your inbox

Expert tips and guidance on getting published and maximizing the impact of your research. Register now for weekly insights direct to your inbox.

Dan Ariely - Predictably Irrational

Sample Cover Letter for Journal Manuscript Resubmissions

• Affiliate Program

• UNITED STATES
• 台灣 (TAIWAN)
• TÜRKIYE (TURKEY)
• Academic Editing Services
• - Research Paper
• - Journal Manuscript
• - Dissertation
• - College & University Assignments
• Admissions Editing Services
• - Application Essay
• - Personal Statement
• - Recommendation Letter
• - Cover Letter
• - CV/Resume
• Business Editing Services
• - Business Documents
• - Report & Brochure
• - Website & Blog
• Writer Editing Services
• - Script & Screenplay
• Our Editors
• Client Reviews
• Editing & Proofreading Prices
• Wordvice Points
• Partner Discount
• Plagiarism Checker
• APA Citation Generator
• MLA Citation Generator
• Chicago Citation Generator
• Vancouver Citation Generator
• - APA Style
• - MLA Style
• - Chicago Style
• - Vancouver Style
• Writing & Editing Guide
• Academic Resources
• Admissions Resources

How to Write a Cover Letter for Journal Submission

If you’re looking for solid advice on how to write a strong journal submission cover letter that will convince journal editors to review your research paper, then look no further! We know that cover letters  can  impact an editor’s decision to consider your research paper further.

This guide aims to explain (1) why you should care about writing a powerful cover letter, (2) what you should include in it, and (3) how you should structure it. The last segment will include a free downloadable submission cover letter template with detailed how-to explanations and some useful phrases. Finally, be sure to get journal manuscript editing , cover letter editing , and other academic editing services by Wordvice’s professional editors to ensure that you convey an academic style and error-free text, along with including all of the most important content.

Why does a good cover letter matter?

While your research paper’s role is to prove the merits of your research, a strong introductory cover letter is your opportunity to highlight the significance of your research and “sell” its concept to journal editors.

While your research paper’s role is to prove the merits of your research, a strong introductory cover letter is your opportunity to highlight the significance of your research and “sell” its concept to journal editors.

Sadly, we must admit that part of the decision-making process of whether to accept a manuscript is based on a business model. Editors must select articles that will interest their readers. In other words, your paper, if published, must make money . When it’s not quite clear how your research paper might generate interest based on its title and content alone (for example, if your paper is too technical for most editors to appreciate), your cover letter is the one opportunity you will get to convince the editors that your work is worth further review.

In addition to economic factors, many editors use the cover letter to screen whether authors can follow basic instructions . For example, if a journal’s guide for authors states that you must include disclosures, potential reviewers, and statements regarding ethical practices, failure to include these items might lead to the automatic rejection of your article, even if your research is the most progressive project on the planet! By failing to follow directions, you raise a red flag that you may be careless, and if you’re not attentive to the details of a cover letter, editors might wonder about the quality and thoroughness of your research. This is not the impression you want to give editors!

What to Include in a Cover Letter for a Journal Submission

We can’t stress this enough: Follow your target journal’s instructions for authors ! No matter what other advice you read in the vast webosphere, make sure you prioritize the information requested by the editors of the journal you are submitting to. As we explained above, failure to include required statements will lead to an automatic “ desk rejection ”.

With that said, below is a list of the most common elements you must include in your cover letter and what information you should NOT include:

Essential information:

• Editor’s name (when known)
• Name of the journal to which you are submitting
• Your manuscript’s title
• Article type (review, research, case study, etc.)
• Submission date
• Brief background of your study and the research question you sought to answer
• Brief overview of methodology used
• Principle findings and significance to scientific community (how your research advances our understanding of a concept)
• Corresponding author contact information
• Statement that your paper has not been previously published and is not currently under consideration by another journal and that all authors have approved of and have agreed to submit the manuscript to this journal

Other commonly requested information:

• Short list of similar articles previously published by the target journal
• List of relevant works by you or your co-authors that have been previously published or are under consideration by other journals. You can include copies of those works.
• Mention of any prior discussions with editor(s) (for example, if you discussed the topic with an editor at a conference)
• Technical specialties required to evaluate your paper
• Potential reviewers and their contact information
• If needed, reviewers to exclude (this information is most likely also requested elsewhere in online submissions forms)

Other disclosures/statements required by the journal (e.g., compliance with ethical standards, conflicts of interest , agreement to terms of submission, copyright sign-over, etc.)

What you should NOT do:

• Don’t use too much jargon or include too many acronyms.
• Don’t over-embellish your findings or their significance. Avoid words such as “novel,” “first ever,” and “paradigm-changing.” These types of statements show bias and will make the editor question your ability to assess your work’s merits objectively.
• Don’t name-drop. Listing people who might endorse your paper and discussing authors’ reputations do not interest editors. They want to know if your content fits their criteria, so focus solely on addressing that point.
• Don’t write a novel. While you want to adequately explain your work and sell its concept to editors, keep your cover letter to a maximum of one page. The letter is only meant to be an introduction and brief overview.
• Avoid humor . As much as we want to grab the editors’ attention, there are too many ways in which humor can go wrong!

How to Structure a Cover Letter

You should use formal language in your cover letter. Since most submissions are delivered electronically, the template below is in a modified e-mail format. However, if you send your cover letter on letterhead (PDF or hard copy by mail), move your contact information to the upper-left corner of the page unless you use pre-printed letterhead, in which case your contact information should be centered at the top of the letter.

ANNOTATED TEMPLATE Journal Submissions Cover Letter

[Journal Editor’s First and Last Name][, Graduate Degree (if any)] TIP: It’s customary to include any graduate degrees in the addressee’s name. e.g.,  John Smith, MD or Carolyn Daniels, MPH [Title] e.g.,  Editor-in-Chief, Managing Editor, Co-Editors-in-Chief [Journal Name] [Journal Address] [Submission Date: Month Day, Year]

Dear Dr./Mr./Ms. [Editor’s last name]:

TIP: Where the editor’s name is not known, use the relevant title employed by the journal, such as “Dear Managing Editor:” or “Dear Editor-in-Chief:”. Using a person’s name is best, however.

TIP: Use “Ms.” and never “Mrs.” or “Miss” in formal business letters.

TIP:  Never   use “Dear Sirs:” or any similar expression. Many editors will find this insulting, especially given that many of them are female!

[Para.1: 2–3 sentences]  I am writing to submit our manuscript entitled, [“Title”] for consideration as a [Journal Name][Article Type]. [One to two sentence “pitch” that summarizes the study design, where applicable, your research question, your major findings, and the conclusion.]

e.g.,  I am writing to submit our manuscript entitled, “X Marks the Spot” for consideration as an  Awesome Science Journal  research article. We examined the efficacy of using X factors as indicators for depression in Y subjects in Z regions through a 12-month prospective cohort study and can confirm that monitoring the levels of X is critical to identifying the onset of depression, regardless of geographical influences.

TIP: Useful phrases to discuss your findings and conclusion include:

• Our findings confirm that…
• We have determined that…
• Our results suggest…
• We found that…
• We illustrate…
• Our findings reveal…
• Our study clarifies…
• Our research corroborates…
• Our results establish…
• Our work substantiates…

[Para. 2: 2–5 sentences]  Given that [context that prompted your research], we believe that the findings presented in our paper will appeal to the [Reader Profile] who subscribe to [Journal Name]. Our findings will allow your readers to [identify the aspects of the journal’s  Aim and Scope  that align with your paper].

TIP: Identify the journal’s typical audience and how those people can utilize your research to expand their understanding of a topic. For example, if many of your target journal’s readers are interested in the public policy implications of various research studies, you may wish to discuss how your conclusions can help your peers to develop stronger policies that more effectively address public concerns.

TIP: Include context about why this research question had to be addressed.

e.g.,  “Given the struggle policymakers have had to define proper criteria to diagnose the onset of depression in teenagers, we felt compelled to identify a cost-effective and universal methodology that local school administrators can use to screen students.”

TIP: If your paper was prompted by prior research, state this. For example, “After initially researching X, Y approached us to conduct a follow-up study that examined Z. While pursuing this project, we discovered [some new understanding that made you decide the information needed to be shared with your peers via publication.]”

e.g.,  Given the alarming increase in depression rates among teenagers and the lack of any uniform practical tests for screening students, we believe that the findings presented in our paper will appeal to education policymakers who subscribe to  The Journal of Education . Although prior research has identified a few methods that could be used in depression screening, such as X and Y, the applications developed from those findings have been cost-prohibitive and difficult to administer on a national level. Thus, our findings will allow your readers to understand the factors involved in identifying the onset of depression in teenagers better and develop more cost-effective screening procedures that can be employed nationally. In so doing, we hope that our research advances the toolset needed to combat the concerns preoccupying the minds of many school administrators.

[Para 3: Similar works]  “This manuscript expands on the prior research conducted and published by [Authors] in [Journal Name]” or “This paper [examines a different aspect of]/ [takes a different approach to] the issues explored in the following papers also published by [Journal Name].”

TIP: You should mention similar studies recently published by your target journal, if any, but list no more than five. If you only want to mention one article, replace the preceding sentence with “This paper [examines a different aspect of]/ [takes a different approach to] the issues explored by [Authors] in [Article Title], also published by [Journal Name] on [DATE].”

[Para. 4: Additional statements often required]  Each of the authors confirms that this manuscript has not been previously published and is not currently under consideration by any other journal. Additionally, all of the authors have approved the contents of this paper and have agreed to the [Journal Name]’s submission policies.

TIP: If you have previously publicly shared some form or part of your research elsewhere, state so. For example, you can say, “We have presented a subset of our findings [at Event]/ [as a Type of Publication Medium] in [Location] in [Year].”

e.g.,  We have since expanded the scope of our research to contemplate international feasibility and acquired additional data that has helped us to develop a new understanding of geographical influences.

[Para. 5: Potential Reviewers]  Should you select our manuscript for peer review, we would like to suggest the following potential reviewers/referees because they would have the requisite background to evaluate our findings and interpretation objectively.

• [Name, institution, email, expertise]

To the best of our knowledge, none of the above-suggested persons have any conflict of interest, financial or otherwise.

TIP: Include 3–5 reviewers since it is likely that the journal will use at least one of your suggestions.

TIP: Use whichever term (“reviewer” or “referee”) your target journal uses. Paying close attention to a journal’s terminology is a sign that you have properly researched the journal and have prepared!

[Para. 6: Frequently requested additional information]  Each named author has substantially contributed to conducting the underlying research and drafting this manuscript. Additionally, to the best of our knowledge, the named authors have no conflict of interest, financial or otherwise.

[Your Name]

Corresponding Author Institution Title Institution/Affiliation Name [Institution Address] [Your e-mail address] [Tel: (include relevant country/area code)] [Fax: (include relevant country/area code)]

Additional Contact [should the corresponding author not be available] Institution Title Institution/Affiliation Name [Institution Address] [Your e-mail address] [Tel: (include relevant country/area code)] [Fax: (include relevant country/area code)]

Quick Cover Letter Checklist Before Submission

• Set the font to Arial or Times New Roman, size 12 point.
• Single-space all text.
• Use one line space between body paragraphs.
• Do not indent paragraphs.
• Keep all text left justified.
• Use spelling and grammar check software. If needed, use a proofreading service or cover letter editing service  such as Wordvice to review your letter for clarity and concision.
• Double-check the editor’s name. Call the journal to confirm if necessary.

• Office of Undergraduate Research
• Current Students
• Online Only Students
• Faculty & Staff
• Parents & Family
• Alumni & Friends
• Community & Business
• Student Life
• Student Assistants
• Latest News
• What is Research
• Get Started
• First-Year Scholars Program
• Current Research Projects
• Involvement Opportunities
• Undergraduate Research Space
• About to Graduate?
• Find Undergraduate Researchers
• Request a Classroom Visit
• Presenting and Publishing
• Workshops and Training
• Office of Research

Writing a Cover Letter and Response to Reviewers

Explore the possibilities.

The main purpose of your response to reviewers is to tell the editors how you have revised your manuscript since your initial submission.   You should address each suggested revision made by the reviewers and explain how you have chosen to respond.  The document should be formatted in such a way that the editors can easily track changes made to your manuscript.  It should be organized by reviewer (e.g., Reviewer 1, Reviewer 2) and address the reviews point-by-point.  Comments and responses should be clearly distinguishable.

For example:

1.Your manuscript contains grammatical errors.  For example, on page 3, you used “their” when you should  have used “there.”

We have thoroughly proofread the manuscript and corrected all grammatical errors.

2. The second paragraph of your introduction needs more details about findings by Owl and colleagues (2017).  Be sure to explain their operational definition of “school spirit.”

We agree with Reviewer 1’s assessment of this paragraph and have decided to expand upon it.  We have provided a more detailed summary of Owl and colleagues’ findings, including the operational definition they used for “school spirit” for their study.

1. On pages 1 and 6, you did not include the year of publication in an in-text citation.

We have included years of publication as they correspond to the sources listed on the references page.

2. Two of the sources in your references lack a hanging indentation.

This error has been corrected; all sources are correctly formatted with hanging indentations.

Unless otherwise specified in the email your received from the editors, you may choose whether or not to make any suggested changes.  However, even if you do not change something that has been suggested, you must still address the suggestion in your response, and you must provide a compelling argument for your decision.

1. “Theatre” should be spelled “theater” because “theatre” is not the standard American English spelling.  This is a repeating occurrence.

While Reviewer 1 is correct that most Americans do spell the word “theater,” scholars in my field would accept the use of “theatre” in the context in which I use it in this manuscript.  Thus, I have chosen not to change this spelling.

Additionally, you should:

• Use a professional letter format (i.e., address the correct audience, state your purpose, and be signed by the author(s) of the manuscript) for your cover letter.
• Use a professional tone (i.e., use polite wording throughout the cover letter and response to reviewers, including when making your case for choosing not to follow a reviewer’s suggestion).
• Make sure you have made any changes both within the manuscript AND described them within your response.
• Make all changes and resubmit your manuscript, cover letter, and response to reviewers within the time frame allotted by the editors.

Contact Info

Kennesaw Campus 1000 Chastain Road Kennesaw, GA 30144

Marietta Campus 1100 South Marietta Pkwy Marietta, GA 30060

Campus Maps

Phone 470-KSU-INFO (470-578-4636)

kennesaw.edu/info

Media Resources

Resources For

Related Links

• Financial Aid
• Degrees, Majors & Programs
• Job Opportunities
• Campus Security
• Global Education
• Sustainability
• Accessibility

470-KSU-INFO (470-578-4636)

© 2024 Kennesaw State University. All Rights Reserved.

• Privacy Statement
• Accreditation
• Emergency Information
• Report a Concern
• Open Records
• Human Trafficking Notice

• SpringerLink shop

Cover letters

A good cover letter can help to “sell” your manuscript to the journal editor. As well as introducing your work to the editor you can also take this opportunity to explain why the manuscript will be of interest to a journal's readers, something which is always as the forefront editors’ mind. As such it is worth spending time writing a coherent and persuasive cover letter.

The following is an example of a poor cover letter:

Dear Editor-in-Chief, I am sending you our manuscript entitled “Large Scale Analysis of Cell Cycle Regulators in bladder cancer” by Researcher et al. We would like to have the manuscript considered for publication in Pathobiology. Please let me know of your decision at your earliest convenience. With my best regards, Sincerely yours, A Researcher, PhD

Instead, check to see whether the journal’s Instructions for Authors have any cover letter requirements (e.g. disclosures, statements, potential reviewers). Then, write a letter that explains why the editor would want to publish your manuscript. The following structure covers all the necessary points that need to be included.

• If known, address the editor who will be assessing your manuscript by their name. Include the date of submission and the journal you are submitting to.
• First paragraph: include the title of your manuscript and the type of manuscript it is (e.g. review, research, case study). Then briefly explain the background to your study, the question you sought out to answer and why.
• Second paragraph: you should concisely explain what was done, the main findings and why they are significant.
• Third paragraph: here you should indicate why the readers of the journal would be interested in the work. Take your cues from the journal’s aims and scope. For example if the journal requires that all work published has broad implications explain how your study fulfils this. It is also a good idea to include a sentence on the importance of the results to the field.
• To conclude state the corresponding author and any journal specific requirements that need to be complied with (e.g. ethical standards).

TIP: All cover letters should contain these sentences:

• We confirm that this manuscript has not been published elsewhere and is not under consideration by another journal.
• All authors have approved the manuscript and agree with its submission to [insert the name of the target journal].

Submission checklist

Before submitting your manuscript, thoroughly check its quality one more time. Evaluate it critically—could anything be done better?

Be sure that:

• The manuscript follows the Instructions for Authors
• All files are in the correct file format and of the appropriate resolution or size
• The spelling and grammar are correct
• You have contact information for all authors
• You have written a persuasive cover letter

Back │ Next

Getting Published: Revise and Resubmit

• APS Journals

One of the most important steps in the research process is communicating findings to colleagues. However, as anyone who has submitted research to a journal knows, getting your research published in a reputable journal can be a confusing, lengthy, and frustrating process.

At this year’s meeting of the Western Psychological Association in Irvine, California, Nancy Eisenberg and Steven West, both of Arizona State University, delivered an invited presentation on publishing from the editors’ perspective. In addition to having published hundreds of articles, each has been on the editorial boards of numerous journals. Eisenberg is currently the editor of Psychological Bulletin and West is the editor of Psychological Methods . They outlined what is expected of empirical and review papers, gave an overview of the editorial process, and provided valuable advice on what to do with that dreaded “revise/resubmit” decision.

What is Expected of an Empirical Paper? Editors are looking for well-organized, logical papers. Authors should be critical of all perspectives, including their own, and fairly represent alternative explanations. The scope of the literature review will depend on the journal; some journals require multi-page theoretical development while others require brevity. Empirical papers are often rejected because of serious problems in the methods or data analyses, which are not as easily fixed as problems in the introduction or discussion sections. Methods must be accurate and manageable and you must match the complexity of your analyses with your research question and methodology.

What is Expected of a Review Paper? A good review paper is more than a summary of existing literature. A good review must draw new conclusions, ask new questions, or identify new directions based on existing literature. Eisenberg noted that reviews differ from book chapters in that a typical book chapter brings material together, but does not push the field forward.

Methods by which reviews advance the field include looking at a new mediation variable in a meta-analysis, presenting a new conceptual model to explain existing data, comparing or integrating existing conceptual models, or demonstrating how the existing literature supports a new theoretical perspective.

It is important for the review to present all literature and perspectives clearly and fairly. Reviews are expected to write as critically-minded scientists, not as advocates for a specific position.

Choosing a Journal The first rule in choosing a journal is to know the journal. As many as 10 percent of the submissions a journal receives are from authors who have never seen the journal. You should be familiar with the types of articles the journal typically publishes. Pay attention to the methodology as well as the content area; a lack of qualitative research may reflect the editor’s preference for quantitative research.

Be sure to look at the journal’s mission statement before dismissing the journal, especially if you are submitting unusual research. It may be that your research fits the mission statement and is exactly what the editor seeks, but is not represented in the journal because it is rarely submitted. If you are uncertain whether your research is appropriate for a particular journal – ask. Send an email to the editor describing your research in a couple paragraphs and ask whether it may be of interest.

The Review Process The editor may work directly with your paper or may delegate it to an associate editor. The preferences and specialization of your associate editor may affect the evaluation of your research. You can express a preference for a specific associate editor when you submit your manuscript. If you are unfamiliar with an editor, ask colleagues about their experiences with that editor. In general, new editors and editorial boards are more conservative. It may be to your advantage to direct your work to more experienced editors.

The associate editor will choose 3-4 reviewers to evaluate your work. Most editors choose reviewers who represent a variety of perspectives on the content area. You can assist the editor by suggesting well-known and respected researchers who are familiar with the content and methods. Some editors will appreciate this assistance and you may have an opportunity to direct your work to reviewers you believe will be favorable and fair. The reviewers return their evaluations and recommendations to the associate editor, who makes the final decision regarding your paper. Editors generally follow the recommendations of the reviewers – but they may occasionally deviate from the reviewers’ opinions.

It is extremely rare for a paper to be accepted with no revisions. West noted that during his tenure as the editor of Psychological Methods , no articles have been unconditionally accepted. Slightly less rare is an acceptance that is contingent upon suggested revisions. West estimated that only 5 percent of the articles in Psychological Methods have been conditionally accepted on the first submission. It is much more likely that you will be advised to revise and resubmit your paper. Such decisions accounted for 25 percent of the manuscripts submitted to Psychological Methods (for their first review).

Although many authors are discouraged by “revise and resubmit” decisions, the presenters stressed that you should be heartened by such feedback. West noted that this decision indicates that the editor likes your work, believes that you can fix the paper’s problems, and hopes that you will. He added that if you do resubmit, you have a good chance of having your paper accepted. Eighty percent of the articles resubmitted to his journal are eventually published. Eisenberg conservatively estimates that you have at a least a 50 percent chance of eventually getting published if you have been advised to revise and resubmit.

In this light, a “revise and resubmit” decision should be viewed as good news – if you can possibly address even some of the reviewers objections, you should certainly consider resubmitting before submitting to another journal or consigning your manuscript to a file drawer. According to West, women and minorities have been found to have disproportionately low rates of publication. However, further investigation found women and minorities received the same initial rates of acceptances, revise/resubmits, and rejections as everyone else, but were less likely to resubmit revised papers. Do not underestimate the importance of persistence.

Resubmission Initial acceptances are so rare that you should expect to revise your submission. When you resubmit, include a detailed cover letter explaining how you responded to each of the reviewers’ comments. Eisenberg’s own resubmission cover letters are typically between four and seven pages long. Try your best to address the concerns of all the reviewers. Be flexible about making changes that don’t significantly alter the thrust of your paper. Although it may not feel like it at the time, the suggested changes generally do improve your paper.

Reviewers want to be taken seriously and may be offended if they receive a resubmission that ignores their feedback. If you choose not to make a specific revision you should acknowledge and support this decision in the cover letter. In this way, you can respectfully disagree with the reviewer and plead your case. The reviewer may not be convinced, but at least you will avoid a bruised ego. Unless you had a particularly hostile and unreasonable reviewer, resist the urge to ask for new reviewers. New reviewers are likely to bring up new issues that must be addressed.

Changing Journals Generally, the only times you should consider submitting to another journal are when your paper has been rejected without an invitation to resubmit and when the revisions the reviewers want are not feasible. You generally should not switch journals after being advised to revise and resubmit because, as noted previously, you have a good chance of eventually being published in your first-choice journal. Changing journals means that you will have to begin the process all over again.

When you send your article to a new journal you do not need to tell them that it has already been submitted and rejected from another journal. However, you should not simply submit your paper without making any changes. Your paper may be sent to the same reviewers as the first time it was reviewed. If you have not incorporated any of the reviewers’ feedback, they are unlikely to give you a favorable review. So, when you choose to submit to a new journal you should expect it to be as much work as revising and resubmitting to the same journal.

APS regularly opens certain online articles for discussion on our website. Effective February 2021, you must be a logged-in APS member to post comments. By posting a comment, you agree to our Community Guidelines and the display of your profile information, including your name and affiliation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations present in article comments are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the views of APS or the article’s author. For more information, please see our Community Guidelines .

Please login with your APS account to comment.

About the Author

VICTORIA C. ROMERO is a graduate student at Claremont Graduate University. Her research interests include attention and perceptual development in infancy.

Research Briefs

Recent highlights from APS journals articles.

Recent highlights from APS journals articles on the link between self-esteem and eating disorders, how to be liked in first encounters, the effects of stress on rigid learning, and much more.

Recent highlights from APS journals articles on learned cognitive flexibility, visual short-term memory across multiple fixations, spatial cognition and its malleability, and much more.

Privacy Overview

Consortium for Democratizing Academic Publishing and Knowledge

An academic mentoring site!

D. Cover Letter for Resubmission

When one submits the revised version of a manuscript, the cover letter is slightly different from the one for the initial submission. Authors will be expected to make clear how they responded to the suggestions of the editor and the reviewers. In many journals, the editor might explicitly mention a separate document to outline the revisions in detail. In such cases, the authors can start with a general statement of their changes in the cover letter, not forgetting to thank the reviewers for the time they spent on reading the manuscript. Then they can append the details of their changes in a separate document. Note that not all suggestions have to be accepted. In some cases, the author might feel that the suggestion might conflict with one’s own objectives for that paper. In such situations, the authors can explain their reasons for their opinion and explain the alternate strategies they adopted for their revision.

The detailed response can take many forms. In many cases, authors organize the response in two parallel columns. In the first, they mention the suggestions of the editor and each reviewer. In the parallel line on the second column, they indicate how they responded to that suggestion.

Others go line by line through the revisions to comment next to each of them and elaborate their own responses and changes.

It is important for authors not to ignore any major suggestions of the reviewers. In most cases, the revised version will be sent to the same reviewers for a second review. The reviewers and editor will decline publication when they see that the author has not acted upon some of the important suggestions.

–Suresh Canagarajah

Revise and Resubmit an Application

Here we cover factors to consider for revising and resubmitting an application, then rules for resubmitting, and finally our advice for resubmission applications.

Before committing to a resubmission, you may want to assess your other Options if Your Application Isn't Funded as well.

Table of Contents

Considerations for resubmissions, rules for resubmitting, resubmission timing, tips for a strong resubmission application.

You probably want to jump right into your resubmission, but first check your original notice of funding opportunity (NOFO) to confirm it hasn't expired, you still meet eligibility requirements, and NIAID (or your chosen institute) still participates.

If the announcement has been reissued or updated, make sure you're aware of new deadlines, eligibility criteria, forms, and instructions, all of which may have changed since your previous application.

If you applied to a program announcement (PA), program announcement with set-aside funds (PAS), or program announcement with special receipt, referral and/or review considerations (PAR), you may resubmit to the same or a different PA, PAS, or PAR. But you'll still want to check your new NOFO for the information we just mentioned.

Should You Wait for the Summary Statement?

You may want to begin revising even before you get your summary statement since waiting may cause you to miss the next receipt date.

While you must address all the reviewers' comments from your summary statement, you can start adding new data or making other improvements to the application.

Just keep in mind that you'll still have to wait for your summary statement before you resubmit, and you may have to revise your application further based on what reviewers note.

Choose Your Path

Your resubmission can take one of two paths: revise and request the same study section or revise and request a different study section. Keep in mind you might not have a study section choice for some notices of funding opportunities, e.g., PARs.

Revising and Requesting the Same Study Section. If your reviewers were enthusiastic about your idea and found fixable problems, revising and requesting the same study section is usually the way to go. This route is the most common one and works well when the points of contention are limited.

Reviewers look at the application in the context of their critiques, so the approach is effective if you can readily answer their concerns.

Be aware that your application may still face some new reviewers who may raise different issues.

Revising and Requesting a Different Study Section. If your reviewers were not enthusiastic about your idea, reassess the study section.

Do you have a sense that no matter what you wrote your reviewers wouldn't have appreciated it? That's a clue that your application and the study section were a poor fit.

But be careful not to assume that the reviewers were the problem—first thoroughly size up the application's faults that they identified.

To gauge whether the study section may have been unsuitable, use the roster attached to your summary statement to view the committee members' names, and check out their publications. Then ask yourself these questions:

• Did the reviewers' expertise fit your topic?
• Were they knowledgeable about your methods?
• Did they understand the rationale for your research?

If the verdict is no for any of the above, the study section may not have been the best fit. Talk to colleagues and mentors to get their take and before you decide whether to request a new study section, keeping the following points in mind:

• You have no guarantee of anyone's presence at the meeting—including past reviewers—because participants rotate on and off, and NIH uses ad hoc reviewers.
• You'll still have to address reviewer critiques from the first review even though that critique came from a different study section. Your new study section sees the summary statement and expects you to make appropriate changes.

Cautionary Notes About Resubmissions

Consider the following words of caution:

• Use the most recent version of the NOFO and forms, even if it's not the one you used originally.
• Do not resubmit until you can send in the strongest possible application that effectively addresses all the reviewers' comments. We can't stress the point enough.
• If a significant amount of time passes before you can resubmit, reassess the science and consider submitting a new application instead of a resubmission, particularly if the science has evolved.

Don't launch into your resubmission until you've read our instructions and advice below.

Resubmissions have several unique rules. For example, you must address all your reviewers' points and highlight their comments in the introduction and usually in the Research Plan (unless too much has changed).

Though you may be able to start revising before you get your summary statement, you'll need the summary statement for your discussion with your program officer and to address the reviewers' feedback in the application.

When you start revising, discuss the reviewers' points one by one.

Enhance your application in any way you can—even in areas your reviewers did not question, for example, by adding new data.

When you resubmit, you're playing by new rules:

• Rule 1: You have just one opportunity to resubmit.
• Rule 2: You must apply within 37 months of the original application's receipt date.
• Rule 3: You must create a one-page introduction that addresses all your reviewers' issues that are stated in your summary statement. Reviewers will look for their comments and check that you revised accordingly.

You may also enhance the rest of your application by adding any new information and data you wish.

Here's how to proceed:

• Highlight your reviewers' comments in your introduction and the body of your application, usually in the Research Plan. But if changes are so extensive that most text would be affected, explain them in the introduction only.
• Summarizes the substantial additions, deletions, and changes to the application.
• Responds to major weaknesses raised in the summary statement.
• Note that identifying individual changes by using brackets, indents, or change of typography in the text of Specific Aims, Research Strategy, and other application attachments is no longer required, though NIH will continue to accept applications that contain the specific mark-ups.
• Include any new preliminary data you have, and strengthen the application where possible—even in areas your reviewers did not question.
• Use the forms from the most current notice of funding opportunity, and scan the notice of funding opportunity to see if anything has changed.

Even if you take all these steps, you have no guarantee of success for several reasons:

• Reviewers are not wedded to their critiques.
• New reviewers may disagree with previous comments or raise new criticisms.
• Because a summary statement is not an exhaustive critique of your proposal, it may not list all concerns reviewers had (plus issues they may have raised had the discussion continued).

That said, many people get funded after revising, and usually a resubmission can't hurt you.

Many resubmissions score better than the initial application, though of course there's no guarantee. 

Even if your resubmission scores slightly worse, that probably won't affect the funding chances of an earlier application. If you've submitted two applications, NIAID can still fund the earlier one.

eRA Commons will keep both versions of your application active. You'll see the "MAA" (Multiple Active Application) flag in the Commons. When one application is funded, NIH automatically withdraws the other.

If you are on a list for possible selective pay or end-of-year funding, resubmit—don't wait to see what will happen.

You may be able to start revising right away, but take the time to do the best job you can.

You only have one opportunity to resubmit, so make it your best shot. Do not resubmit until you can send in the strongest possible application that effectively addresses all the reviewers' comments. Get advice from your program officer and experts in your institution before proceeding and again after you prepare your resubmission.

Some people begin revising even before getting the summary statement because waiting may cause them to miss the next receipt date. Note: Summary statements for new investigator R01 applications are prioritized, and when possible, released before summary statements for other applications reviewed in the same meeting.

You could start revising before you get your summary statement if you have promising new data or other improvements you want to include.

Then after you get your summary statement, add to the revisions you've already made to address peer reviewer concerns.

We strongly recommend that even if your application scored just above the payline or is on a list for possible selective pay or end-of-year funding, don't wait to see what will happen. Start revising as soon as you can and resubmit when ready, keeping in mind the caveats noted above and in the next section below.

Read more about timing at Timelines and Due Dates .

When Not to Resubmit Quickly

Sometimes waiting has little impact on the timing of an award.

Don't rush. It's better to wait for the next receipt date than send an application prematurely. And if you need additional preliminary data or new data is imminent, wait until you have it before resubmitting.

• For Cycle 1 receipt dates (September-October Council), you often have to wait several extra months before you get an award because the Institute does not yet have a budget for the following fiscal year.
• If you wait to submit for the Cycle 3 receipt dates (May Council) instead, you could lose just a month or two before you actually get an award.

Here are some tips to help you succeed.

Capitalize on your strengths and throw out or revise the parts reviewers felt were weak. Check again that your Specific Aims line up with your hypothesis.

Respond point by point to the reviewers' comments and suggestions, stating how you dealt with all the criticisms in the summary statement. Your program officer may be able to advise you as you consider application changes.

• Summarizes the issues and criticisms and respond in as much detail as possible.
• Research Plan and elsewhere in the body of your application. Update as needed to respond. If you're cramped for space, don't drop important details in favor of making space to address reviewer comments.

Be respectful even if you disagree.

• If you disagree, explain why, and provide additional information if possible.
• Even better, change your proposal. For example, if reviewers don't like an approach, propose a different one, even if you don't agree.

Identify changes . To identify substantial scientific changes, do the following:

• Note: Identifying individual changes by using brackets, indents, or change of typography in the text of Specific Aims, Research Strategy, and other application attachments is no longer required, though NIH will continue to accept applications that contain the specific mark-ups.

Add new findings and your own improvements. You aren't limited to revising only items mentioned in the summary statement.

• In the Preliminary Studies/Progress Report, add any new findings you've gotten since the previous application.
• Don't hesitate to make other changes. Strengthen the application as much as you can.

See what worked for others. We offer two samples R01 resubmission applications that scored well.

Spot The Sample

See what worked for our two resubmission Sample Applications:

• Application from Dr. William Faubion , "Inflammatory cascades disrupt Treg function trough epigenetic mechanisms"
• Application from Drs. Li and Samulski , "Enhance AAV Liver Transduction with Capsid Immune Evasion"

Notice how they approached the reviewers in their applications and how it reflects our advice above:

• Both applications include a summary of critiques and changes made in response.
• The applicants used formatting and sectioning to highlight key points and make it easier for reviews to read the text.
• They made the corresponding changes are described in the introduction.
• Through applicants are no longer required to mark their changes, Drs. Li and Samulski used underlining to show reviewers where the text had changed, while Dr. Faubion used yellow highlighting.

If you decide against resubmitting or your resubmission application doesn’t work out, you may want to assess your other Options if Your Application Isn't Funded .

Previous Step

Have questions.

A program officer in your area of science can give you application advice, NIAID's perspective on your research, and confirmation that your proposed research fits within NIAID’s mission.

Find contacts and instructions at When to Contact an NIAID Program Officer .

When you choose to publish with PLOS, your research makes an impact. Make your work accessible to all, without restrictions, and accelerate scientific discovery with options like preprints and published peer review that make your work more Open.

• PLOS Biology
• PLOS Climate
• PLOS Complex Systems
• PLOS Computational Biology
• PLOS Digital Health
• PLOS Genetics
• PLOS Global Public Health
• PLOS Medicine
• PLOS Mental Health
• PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
• PLOS Pathogens
• PLOS Sustainability and Transformation
• PLOS Collections
• About This Blog
• About PLOS ONE
• Official PLOS Blog
• EveryONE Blog
• Speaking of Medicine
• PLOS Biologue
• Absolutely Maybe
• DNA Science
• PLOS ECR Community
• All Models Are Wrong
• About PLOS Blogs

Ask everyONE: Submitting your revision

When submitting revisions to PLoS ONE , there is sometimes confusion among authors about what files should be included. Here is a brief rundown on our requirements:

• Response to reviewers: This can either be included in your revised cover letter, or as a separate file
• New “clean” copy of the manuscript without any track changes
• Revised manuscript with track changes

While completing resubmission, you will have the option to include or remove any files that were previously uploaded during original submission. Please remember to remove any old files that have changed so that only the most up-to-date files are reflected in your new merged PDF.

To find answers to more commonly asked questions please check out our Most Common Questions page . If you have a more immediate question though, please contact us directly at plosone [at] plos.org.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name and email for the next time I comment.

• About Grants

Resubmission Applications

A resubmission is an unfunded application that has been modified following initial review and resubmitted for consideration.

• A resubmission application can follow a competing new, renewal, or revision application (A0) that was not selected for funding (including applications "not discussed" in review).
• Only a single resubmission (A1) of a competing new, renewal, or revision application (A0) will be accepted.
• A resubmission has a suffix in its application identification number, e.g., A1. (Resubmissions were previously called “amended” applications, hence “A1”.)
• Resubmission must be listed in the Application Types Allowed section of the funding opportunity in order to submit a resubmission application.
• You may resubmit using a different PA, PAR, or PAS program announcement  that accepts resubmissions, provided eligibility and other requirements are met.
• You must submit a new application (not a resubmission) if switching between a program announcement and request for application (RFA) or if changing activity codes (see NOT-OD-18-197 for exceptions).
• You may submit an unfunded application as new again, without a resubmission.
• Before a resubmission application can be submitted, the PD/PI must have received the summary statement from the previous review.
• You must submit the resubmission application within 37 months of the new, renewal, or revision application it follows.  Thereafter, the application must be submitted as a new application.
• After an unsuccessful resubmission (A1), you may submit the idea as a new application.
• After an unsuccessful submission and/or resubmission of a renewal application, your only option for a subsequent application is to submit as a new application.  While you can submit a renewal resubmission application after an unsuccessful renewal application, you cannot submit a second renewal application following an unsuccessful renewal application.
• Resubmission applications follow the same timeline as other applications (~9 months to award).
• The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time, except in certain limited circumstances.
• Resubmission applications must be submitted through Grants.gov to NIH using ASSIST, Workspace, or an institutional system-to-system solution.
• You may need to make significant changes to the resubmission, compared to the new application that it follows.
• You may include a cover letter, though not required.
• Select "Resubmission" in Type of Application field (box 8) on the SF424 R&R form.
• Do not markup changes within application attachments (e.g., do not highlight, color, bold or italicize changes in Research Strategy).
• Responds to the issues and criticism raised in the summary statement.
• Is one page or less in length, unless specified otherwise in the funding opportunity or is specified differently on our table of page limits .
• In a multi-project application, you must submit an introduction with the Overall component, but introductions within the other components are optional.
• In a resubmission of a revision application the same introduction must describe within the standard page limit the nature and impact of the revision and summarize the changes made to the application since the last submission.
• Career development and fellowship applicants must arrange for resubmission of the three reference letters required for those programs.

History of NIH’s policy on resubmissions

We encourage applicants to discuss questions about resubmission with the NIH Institute/Center scientific contact associated with your grant application. Contacts for your grant can be found in your eRA Commons account.

General questions concerning this policy may be directed to the Division of Receipt and Referral at the Center for Scientific Review.

This page last updated on: April 3, 2023

• Bookmark & Share
• E-mail Updates
• Privacy Notice
• Accessibility
• National Institutes of Health (NIH), 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, Maryland 20892
• NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health

Tips on Manuscript Resubmission: How to Write a Good Rebuttal Letter

Following from ‘ Five Tips for Writing a Good Rebuttal Letter ’, we revisit the theme of manuscript resubmission to academic journals. The initial feedback from editors and reviewer’s about one’s work can trigger a variety of reactions based on its analysis. While authors seek positive feedback in general, the more realistic expectation is to address the reviewer’s requests for revision. Methods of writing a rebuttal letter can determine if manuscript revision is likely to be successful or a futile attempt at resubmission. Should the editorial outcome be negative with equally critical referees, the recommendation is to provide an appeal letter first. However, authors who receive positive feedback can revise in compliance with comments, and submit revisions along with a rebuttal letter.

A Writing Guide – Do’s and Don’ts

A rebuttal letter offers authors an opportunity to address reviewer’s concerns directly, defend aspects of work, and eliminate contextual misunderstandings. This stepwise breakdown of writing a rebuttal letter aims to assist authors during the revision to ensure grant of appeal.

Step 1: Say Thank You

Acknowledge the reviewers time, comments and expertise. Thanking the reviewers sets a positive tone to begin with, providing the basis for an ongoing amicable exchange. Do not insinuate reviewer bias or incompetence. Prudent statements from the author cannot result in a positive re-evaluation of the work.

Step 2: Be Modest

Acknowledge any misunderstandings on your part including a poor presentation that may have led to reviewer’s confusion. Do not imply reviewer incompetence or lack of expertise in the phrasing of your rebuttal. Be clear, avoiding ambiguous and blank statements.

Step 3: Keep it Short

Respond to each reviewer’s individual comments, by copying the full text within your rebuttal letter . Strive to keep answers brief, succinct and well versed. Explain how you intend to revise the concerns either experimentally or editorially. Do not plead for reconsideration based on lack of funding as one of the reasons surrounding your inability to complete key experiments. Original scientific articles require the full spectrum of research, and the inability to meet reviewer requests experimentally is not viable.

Step 4: Explain Everything

If data required is available as a supplementary article, which the reviewer may have missed, explain this in your rebuttal for clarity. If you are unable to address a point raised in the reviewer comments, explain your reasons for evasion. Do not blatantly ignore reviewer comments, while selectively answering a few.

Step 5: Major Comments and Minor Comments

Often authors receive feedback on their manuscript from the editorial and reviewers as ‘Major’ and ‘Minor’ comments. If reviewer comments deviate from the typical format, categorize the comments provided relative to your work, as major and minor:

• Major comments: delineate major comments based on its relevance to the integral scientific or academic content of your manuscript.
• Minor comments: concern data presentation, table formatting, suggested changes to figures and citation errors, including comments on syntax errors.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Old Webinars
• Webinar Mobile App

How Academic Editors Can Enhance the Quality of Your Manuscript

Avoiding desk rejection Detecting language errors Conveying your ideas clearly Following technical requirements

Common English Translation Mistakes in Academic Writing

Language and Grammar Rules Accurate word choice Maintaining factual correctness Optimizing sentence structure

How to Best Avoid Journal Rejections: 10 Tips for Successful Submission!

Reasons for manuscript rejection Tips for manuscript submission Publication ethics Online submission system

• Manuscript Preparation
• Publishing Research

Top 5 Key Differences Between Methods and Methodology

While burning the midnight oil during literature review, most researchers do not realize that the…

How to Avoid Rejections Due to Language Mistakes

Common language errors Application of English grammar Importance of professional editing Enago services for ESL…

10 Common Statistical Errors to Avoid When Writing Your Manuscript

Why Are Manuscript Revisions Necessary?

Finished Submitting a Journal Manuscript: What’s Next?

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

What would be most effective in reducing research misconduct?

How To Write a Cover Letter in 3 Easy Paragraphs

Application Materials Career Center Career Services Interviewing Job Search

Although you might have written a resume before, cover letters can be a bigger mystery. The good news is: by following a simple, three-paragraph process, you can quickly write a cover letter that will get attention and likely lead to a job interview!

What Is a Cover Letter?

Imagine you’re handing your resume to someone in person. Maybe you’re at a job or career fair, going into an employer’s office, or even handing it to an acquaintance so that they can get it to the hiring manager. You wouldn’t just give that person your resume, turn, and walk away without saying a word. You would probably take the time to  introduce yourself  and explain why you’re giving that person your resume, how you found out about the job, and why you think you’re qualified for it.

That’s the  purpose of a cover letter .

The cover letter is a more personalized introduction than your resume. It’s a message that represents what you would otherwise say in person, face-to-face. It should be uniquely written for each company and position, follow a standard; one-page business letter format, and consist of three to four paragraphs. If possible, it should also include the hiring manager’s name.

The cover letter usually accompanies a resume. It allows you to expand on the  information in the resume  or explain something that might appear as a red flag or barrier to employment. However, just as important is that the cover letter allows the recruiter to assess your written communication skills!

Why Do I Need a Cover Letter?

Cover letters aren’t always required for a job application. Often, they’re listed as an optional document. Most applicants  won’t  submit a cover letter because of this (let’s face it, job applications can take a lot of time!). However, this also means that submitting a cover letter is an extra step that will help you to stand out from the other applicants — and show how interested you are in the position!

How Do I Write a Cover Letter?

Here’s how to write a cover letter in three easy paragraphs:

Paragraph 1 (About You)

This is where you briefly introduce yourself, what position you’re interested in, and how you discovered it (i.e., job posting site, flyer, social media). If someone recommended you for the position, drop their name in the very first sentence and include their title and affiliation.

Also be enthusiastic! List three of your most important or impressive qualifications from your resume to explain why you’re applying for the position. You may also wish to include the degree or program you’re currently studying.

Example: I’m applying for your Human Resource Specialist position found on LinkedIn, as recommended by John Smith, your Office of Human Resource Manager. I would be a valuable addition to your team, with my five years of administrative experience, BAS in Organizational Management, and Microsoft Office certification.

Paragraph 2 (About the Company)

Answer the question “Why do you want to work here?” by researching the company and writing about at least one way that you resonate with its culture, values, or mission. You can get great information by visiting the company’s website (check the About Us or Mission/Vision pages) or by looking them up in the news category of your favorite search engine. Emphasize how your experience meets the company’s needs and why it would be a privilege to work for them.

Example: Congratulations on your team participating in a local Habitat for Humanity build. I would love to work for an organization that is so committed to improving our local communities. I’ve personally participated in four Habitat for Humanity builds; the skills I’ve learned, coupled with the knowledge I gained, have inspired me to seek out other, similar volunteer opportunities within our community.

Paragraph 3 (Thank You and Closing)

Be sure to thank the employer/hiring manager, provide contact information, and mention that you look forward to hearing from them. Express enthusiasm about an upcoming interview!

Example: Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to discussing my professional experience in greater detail in an upcoming interview. You can reach me at [phone number] or [email address].

Is There a Cover Letter Template I Can Use?

Microsoft Word has many attractive and pre-formatted cover letter templates you can use. Simply open Microsoft Word, click new, and then search for “cover letter” to browse all the options.

You can also use this cover letter template sample for reference:

Who Can Help Me Write a Cover Letter?

Eastern Florida State College’s Career Services team is here to assist! Did you know you can  schedule meetings with an EFSC Career Services Coordinator  to get help writing a cover letter?

Whether you have questions about your career path, job hunting, or interview preparation, you can contact your campus’ Career Services Center for personalized assistance or  check our our upcoming events . We look forward to helping you succeed this semester and beyond!

• Recent Posts

• Every Student Needs Career Services: An Interview with Heather Allen - May 8, 2024
• Leave Your Legacy (Paver) at EFSC - April 24, 2024
• 5 Anime To Watch in College - April 10, 2024

Related Posts

10 Superpowers of Extroverts

Build Your Confidence by Coming To Campus: Part 1

Enroll in EFSC’s Non-Credit Welding Course and Unleash Your Potential

• REQUEST INFO

Human Resources

Event Date Thu, Jun 27, 2024 @ 6:00pm - 8:00pm

Register here!

We are thrilled to remind you about the upcoming "You Belong Here" workshop on Writing a Winning Cover Letter . This workshop is scheduled for June 27th, from 6:00 PM to 7:30 PM at the Aggie Square Launch Space, located at 2270 Stockton Boulevard, Sacramento.

Here's what you can expect to learn during this session:

🗣️ The Presentation Focus:

✅ Creating a Compelling Cover Letter:

• Understand why a well-written cover letter is crucial in creating a compelling reason for a hiring manager to respond to your qualifications.
• Learn the importance of focusing on the employer's needs rather than your own.

✅ Strategies for Targeting Your Cover Letter:

• Discover how to tailor your cover letter to speak directly to the needs of the organization and the specific position you are applying for.
• Get tips on how to make your cover letter stand out by making it relevant and personalized.

✅ Practical Tips and Examples:

• Explore practical tips and guidelines for writing an effective cover letter.
• Review templates and sample cover letters to understand what works and why.

Event Category