When reviewers request citations you disagree with, respond professionally by explaining your reasoning while demonstrating you've considered their perspective carefully.
Assess the Reviewer's Intent
First, determine why the reviewer suggested the citation. They may be pointing to established foundational work in the field, highlighting a methodological precedent, or flagging a gap in your literature review. Sometimes reviewers recommend their own work or papers from their research group—while this can feel uncomfortable, the citation may genuinely be relevant.
Craft Your Response Strategically
If you believe the suggested citation isn't relevant, politely explain why in your response letter. Reference specific aspects of your work that differ from the suggested paper—perhaps your methodology diverges significantly, your research question addresses a different angle, or the cited work's findings don't actually support the point the reviewer thinks they do.
For example: "We appreciate the reviewer's suggestion to cite [Paper X]. However, our approach differs in that we focus on [specific distinction], whereas [Paper X] primarily addresses [different scope]. We believe [alternative citation] more directly relates to our methodology because [specific reason]."
When to Compromise
If the citation is somewhat relevant—even if not your first choice—consider adding it. Academic publishing involves negotiation, and including a marginally relevant citation rarely weakens your paper. You can frame it carefully in your text to acknowledge the work without overstating its connection to your research.
If you're uncertain whether a suggested citation truly supports the reviewer's claim, verify the actual content rather than relying on abstracts alone. WisPaper's Scholar QA can help you quickly check specific claims within papers and trace them back to exact paragraphs, ensuring you're making informed decisions about citation relevance.
Document Your Decision
Whatever you choose, clearly explain your reasoning in the response letter. Reviewers appreciate when authors engage thoughtfully with their suggestions rather than dismissing them outright. This demonstrates scholarly rigor and increases the likelihood of acceptance.
