- The other person is not writing your paper. Do not fall into the trap of looking for the things you would have written on that topic. Too many reviewers begin with “what’s missing in this paper is…”. You write that paper. Then read this one.
- Acknowledge what this author has written. Summarize important sections of the paper and reflect the author’s ideas back to them – without judgment or interpretation. Simply reflect the content back to the writer.
- Give the author something in return. This should be a gift – an additional reading (with a reason for mentioning it), a question that will help the writer develop or unlock new ideas, a story that relates to their work.
- Contextualize any feedback you provide by using attribution for your criteria. Provide more than one lens on the work. If for example, the research perspective challenges a certain assumption in a field, mention the field (and some important authors) with the assumptions. The writer can decide whether to address that or not.
- If you are reviewing a paper for a scholarly conference, ask yourself whether the scholarly community could do with some diversity of viewpoints. If a research community has a diversity statement – follow up on that claim by including diverse research perspectives and encouraging authors to join in the conversation.