
A good reviewer is expected to provide constructive feedback that helps authors improve their work. This involves critically evaluating the manuscript, identifying its strengths and weaknesses, and suggesting potential improvements. A good reviewer should also be able to communicate their feedback clearly and respectfully, taking into account the author's perspective and expertise. Furthermore, they should be able to maintain objectivity and avoid personal biases, ensuring that their feedback is fair and unbiased. Ultimately, a good reviewer plays a crucial role in the peer-review process, helping to ensure the quality and validity of research publications.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
