How to write a good (meta-)review
Olivier Jeunen and I teamed up to tackle a topic that is close to our hearts: how to write a great review or meta-review.
If you’ve ever submitted a paper, you probably remember the feeling of opening your reviews. Sometimes it’s encouraging—clear feedback, thoughtful comments, and constructive suggestions. But other times… it can feel like someone dismissed years of your work with a casual “meh” in three vague sentences. That’s the problem: a bad, unconstructive, or unfair review doesn’t just fail to help the authors—it can be deeply demotivating. And in a community like ours, that’s a cost we can’t afford. We want researchers to feel inspired to improve their work, not disheartened into silence.
That’s why Olivier Jeunen and I created practical, experience-based guides on how to write a good (meta-)review, developed for RecSys 2025.
While these slide decks are tailored to our beloved RecSys conference, most of the tips apply equally well to adjacent fields—and, in fact, to any research community where conference papers undergo a peer-review process. We hope they help reviewers bring fairness, clarity, and encouragement into their feedback:
- How to do a good review of a research paper (tips and tricks for reviewers)
- How to do a good meta-review of a research paper (tips and tricks for meta-reviewers/SPC members)
These guides build on the shared wisdom of colleagues across disciplines—plus the lessons we’ve learned from years of reviewing (and, yes, reading our fair share of disappointing reviews).
Working with Olivier—multiple-time winner (and current record holder!!) of the RecSys Best Reviewer Award—was a joy. Together, we’ve also run tutorials on good reviewing practices at ESSIR 2023 and the RecSys Summer School 2024.
Here’s to the next generation of reviewers: thoughtful, fair, and constructive. Because behind every paper is a human being who deserves feedback that makes their work stronger—not their motivation weaker. 🚀