[The Logic of Scientific Reasoning in Peer Review Process]

We outlined the logical argumentation of scientific reasoning, focusing on peer-reviewed rebuttal letters. Initially, we compared the argumentation in the peer review process with that in writing papers, and distinguished between commonly used argumentation and those that are characteristic of rebuttal letters. First, commonly used forms of logical argumentation, such as deductive and inductive argumentation, are introduced, followed by examples of typical errors in reasoning. Subsequently, we explain the forms of logical argumentation characteristic of the peer review process, including the issue of incommensurability and the error of double standards. This article aims to improve our skills in responding to peer-review comments by being more aware of the logical argumentation used in peer review.