How to make cover letters instructive

The title of this editorial can be read to imply cover letters on submitted articles Nature Biomedical Engineering are neither useful nor informative. In fact, most are not. We find that many cover letters for research articles express enthusiasm for the work, repeat the manuscript summary, state that the results represent a major advance, and emphasize the importance of the main research topic. They also typically list authors, eligible reviewers, and excluded experts, as well as any competing interests and other confidential information; However, most of this information is requested by, or can be provided through, the manuscript submission system.

An output of OpenAI’s DALL-E text-to-image generator for the prompt “Many scientists write cover letters for the journal Nature, Pop Art”.
Photo credit: OpenAI

Excitement, outstanding advances, and topical importance are, perhaps expected, passed on more often by authors than are perceived or judged by editors (especially by those with an attitude toward selectivity). Of course, one’s work is an effort and a passion; Still, it’s difficult to convey enthusiasm to an editor who is accustomed to reading many similarly worded cover letters each week, often superficially. Novel, promising, and transformative work, and platform technology with untapped potential are examples of quickly skipped words in the angular gyrus of an editor’s brain as they flip through a cover letter to quickly find the most useful information.

There’s more to the style of a cover letter than a love of your work. The competition to publish in a journal considered highly regarded by peers drives many authors to overemphasize the results of their work and the broader relevance of the field¹. And fears that the work will be misjudged by an editor unfamiliar with the subject may cause some authors to avoid conveying seemingly complex context or background information and exaggerate the implications of their findings.

It is not surprising, therefore, that some editors, when assessing the suitability of a manuscript for their journal, disregard the cover letter or read the manuscript before opening the cover letter file in order to appreciate and evaluate the work in the form to be communicated . Also, the widespread belief that publishers of Nature-branded journals select manuscripts primarily on the basis of the cover letter is a myth; Manuscripts will be checked². So are cover letters for initial submissions a wasted effort? Are they an unhelpful relic from before the internet? Do they influence manuscript selection? Many arguments can be made for and against these questions. Instead, it would be more fruitful to discuss how cover letters accompanying initial submissions of original research articles can be made more insightful. That’s our goal for the rest of this piece.

First and foremost, you should know your audience. Manuscripts are written for many; Cover letters should be written for an audience of one (or for a team of very few). When writing a manuscript, knowing your intended audience primarily means setting the context of the scholarly story appropriately³. Similarly, considering the current scholarly experience of the prospective editor of the manuscript and his fellow editors—if that information is known or available—can shed light on how the cover letter is designed. Has the journal published related work? Does it have a reputation for excellence in the field or for publishing similar types of scientific advances? Are the editors likely to be familiar with the current challenges and opportunities in the field and with the rigorous standards and reporting? Are the editors aware of any relevant controversies?

Second, you help editors understand and evaluate the main contributions of your work. at Nature Biomedical Engineering, for research manuscripts that fit the journal scope, we assess the level of progress, the outreach impact, and the breadth and depth of the work. To do this job well, we need to place the manuscript in the appropriate context⁴. A cover letter is particularly insightful to us when it helps us identify the relevant type of academic progress. Do the authors think that the main contribution of the work is the development of new technologies to expand their biomedical applicability? Or is the value of the work mainly in the performance and translatability of a slightly improved workflow? Are methods or their implementation new? Was the aim of the study to minimize the usability and cost of a device or to increase its functionality? Is the mechanism of action underlying the discovered phenomena a notable contribution? And are the mechanistic insights used to improve understanding of the disease or intervention? We also appreciate it when cover letters provide an appropriate context for the work: for example, which recently published studies are most relevant and why? Do you only work on the state of the art or methodology or build on it? Has the same problem been addressed by other approaches? Has the same hypothesis been examined from different angles? What types of validation support the robustness of the results?

Third, describe the realistic implications of the work. The temptation is to dream big; nevertheless, the credibility of the conclusions improves when suitably qualified. Therefore, indicate the main challenges that lie along the way. Similarly, describe the limitations of the study and whether they result from the assumptions made or from the methods, models, or data collected or used.

The style and format of research manuscripts are limited for good reasons: they make the information easier to find and interpret. The freedom of freeform writing can make it harder to write cover letters well. We can offer a few more pieces of advice: limit their length, structure and detail⁵and explain your work and its context in an understandable way⁶. And use natural language as if you were writing for a semi-supervised learning agent (pictured).