1. Keep objective and fair: the reviewer should keep an objective and fair attitude and make a comprehensive and accurate evaluation of the quality and content of the paper. Avoid personal preferences or emotional factors that affect the evaluation of papers.
2. Clearly point out the problems: the reviewer should clearly point out the problems and shortcomings in the paper so that the author can make targeted revisions. At the same time, the author is suggested to explain and explain the problem so that the author can better understand the problem.
3. Provide specific suggestions for revision: The reviewer should provide specific suggestions for revision in view of the problems in the paper. These suggestions can include improving experimental methods, adjusting data analysis and optimizing discourse structure. At the same time, it is suggested that the author should pay attention to maintaining the academic rigor of the paper during the revision process.
4. Pay attention to the core content of the paper: reviewers should pay attention to the core content of the paper to ensure that the main points and conclusions of the paper are fully supported and demonstrated. For minor issues and details, the requirements can be relaxed appropriately.
5. Respect the author's academic achievements: reviewers should respect the author's academic achievements and avoid personal attacks or unwarranted accusations against the author. When proposing amendments, we should try our best to use constructive language so that the author can accept and adopt these opinions.
6. Keep communication smooth: After giving suggestions for revision, reviewers should keep good communication with the author and answer questions that the author may encounter in the revision process. At the same time, the author is encouraged to actively feedback his own ideas and progress during the revision process, so that the reviewers and the author can jointly promote the perfection of the paper.