Direct comparison
Major vs. Minor Revision: Key Differences
Major revision vs. minor revision: who re-reviews your response, typical turnaround times, and how your response strategy should differ.
Written and maintained by CASRAI Editorial Board
Last updated
Ask CASRAI · free to try
Ask about Major vs. Minor Revision: Key Differences
Ask your first 2 questions free below. Subscribers get 150 a day for $29 a month.
An AI assistant specialized in research administration. It cites the sources behind every answer, labels web answers and says when it can't answer.
Answers draw on CASRAI's guides and dictionary plus the federal and funder documents we index: Federal Register, Grants.gov, Regulations.gov and UKRI.
Works on this site and inside Claude, Cursor and the AI tools you already use.
Everything CASRAI publishes — this page, the dictionary, the guides and the news — stays free to read, with no account and no card.
How do Minor Revision, Major Revision compare side by side?
The table below compares Minor Revision, Major Revision across 7 procurement-relevant dimensions, from what it signals through relative odds of eventual acceptance.
Side-by-side comparison
| Dimension | Minor Revision | Major Revision |
|---|---|---|
| What it signals | Core contribution and methodology are sound; changes are bounded and specific | Substantive issues identified: methodological gaps, missing analyses, or framing problems |
| Who evaluates the response | Usually the editor alone | Usually the original reviewers, on a further review round |
| Typical revision window | Often 2-4 weeks | Often 1-6+ months, depending on scope |
| Typical re-evaluation time | Days to about two weeks, editor-only | Several weeks to a few months, reviewer round included |
| Response letter scope | Brief, targeted, confirms each specific fix | Longer, evidence-based, may include new analyses or data |
| Risk if under-addressed | Editor may request further clarification or escalate to reviewer review | Reviewers may recommend rejection at the second round if concerns are not substantively resolved |
| Relative odds of eventual acceptance | High, if requested changes are made | Favorable but not guaranteed -- genuine second-round evaluation |
Common questions
Common questions about Minor Revision vs Major Revision
Is a minor revision basically an acceptance?
+
Not formally. The editor still needs to see the requested changes made and confirm the response addresses them, but most adequately-addressed minor revisions go on to be accepted.
Does a major revision mean the reviewers were unfavorable?
+
Not necessarily. It reflects the scope of additional work needed, not reviewer hostility -- reviewers can be positive about the contribution while identifying substantive gaps.
Who decides whether a revision is major or minor?
+
The handling editor, informed by the reviewers' recommendations and comments, which do not always agree with each other.
Should I ask the editor to clarify if the decision letter doesn't use either label?
+
Yes, if the required scope of work is genuinely ambiguous from the letter alone. Some journals only use a single "revise and resubmit" category with no major/minor split, in which case the distinction described on this page does not apply at that venue — read the specific requested changes to gauge scope rather than assuming a missing label means minor.
