Offensive and Defensive Writing: The Secret to Getting Your Manuscript Published?

In a recent email conversation with my friend John Knox, he mentioned a game that he played by trying to spot the parts of the text in a scientific article that the author added specifically to address reviewers’ concerns. I have to admit to playing the same game at times. John’s point was that the author, usually wanting to just get the paper published, would often not even bother to incorporate the added text smoothly into the prior text. The resulting new text would stick out like a sore thumb.

I offered a different perspective. Maybe the author wanted to leave the text so obvious that the meaning to readers would be “look at the foolishness that I have to address in my manuscript just to get the paper past the peer reviewers.”

Regardless of the author’s intent, this is defensive writing, responding to what the reviewers want.

Of course, another perspective is that the author is so insightful and careful a writer that the author addresses potential reviewer concerns before submission. That’s offensive writing.

Interestingly, this discussion with John happened right after I had been meaning to write this blog post about offensive and defensive writing styles. Getting your manuscript published requires submitting high-quality science that is written well. In my view, one of the secrets to receiving good reviews is to spot reviewers’ potential concerns and address them upfront before submission.

Of course, being an offensive writer isn’t easy because you have to anticipate what might reviewers have to say about your own work. Self-inspection does not come easy for some of us, but the papers that I see sail through the peer-review process are those that anticipate their greatest weaknesses and address them before submission. Reviewers have much less to say about these papers.

So, be offensive!