"Peer Review" in an academic journal plays a crucial role in it. The peer review is "Justification" in an article and can determine an academic paper's suitability for publication. Here are nine lessons that we DON'T do during our peer review. Do you want to read them?
Here are nine lessons that we DON'T do during our peer review:
Don't state in the comments to the authors your recommendation to the Action Editor.
example: Do NOT write your final decision to the author (i.e., reject, major revisions, minor revisions, or accept)
Don’t laud a manuscript in the comments to the authors while disparaging it in confidential comments to the Action Editor.
example: Reviewer says a big "Yes" while a "No" to EIC.
Don’t provide such detail if you recommend that it be rejected unless using the review as a teachable moment for the author(s).
Don’t recommend a revision if, even with changes, the manuscript will not make a significant contribution.
Don’t make vague or ambiguous text references or blanket opinionated statements that are not supported by data.
Don’t form an opinion of a manuscript after the first reading and then generate a list of criticisms without rereading the manuscript and identifying specific items that corroborate your criticisms.
Don’t leave the authors guessing.
Don't send the review off without looking it over at least once.
Don’t talk down to authors. Science is a collaborative process, and reviewer comments should be made with a collaborative tone and spirit.