How to respond to peer review - a step by step guide to my first response? I'm in the process of responding to my first peer review (major revisions).  There seems to be a lot of advice out there, (even some stuff here: How to write good Response Letters for the reviewers) but there are still a few etiquette and structural things I'm not sure about.


How do you structure your response? Do I respond to the comments chronologically in the order they appear in the paper, or do I create two separate sections for each reviewer?  Maybe a "general" section, followed by separate comments for each reviewer?
Do I write a cover letter thanking the reviewers for their helpful comments?
How casual/formal should I be?  Should I use contractions and a conversational (yet professional) style, or keep it as formal as the article itself?
Any dos/don'ts that would be helpful for me to know?
Variations are possible, but I have found that the following seems to be a fairly typically form of a response to reviewers:


Begin with a letter to the handling editor and reviewers, in which you thank the reviewers for their useful feedback (even if it wasn't) and say you believe you've addressed all comments.  If you've made any really major changes, a sentence or two here is a good to address them.
Quote the reviews as sent and address each comment inline, either saying how you've done what they wanted or explaining why you haven't.  I always organize by reviewer and address in the order of their comments (rather than the structure of the paper) because the goal is to clearly show that you have addressed all comments.


I recommend adopting a polite and semi-formal style.  You can be a bit more informal than the paper, but I still don't use contractions.  

Do not get argumentative with the reviewers, and do not blow off their criticisms.  Even an apparently crazy criticism should be treated politely, and as a matter of confusion rather than as a personal attack.