The comments mix criticisms on what probably are really bad papers
The best thing about the paper in its current form is that is that it is [sic] short, so I did not waste a lot of time reading it;
This kind of prose simply borders on cruelty against the reader. And finally comes the conclusion, which is the intellectual equivalent of bubblegum.
Did all 5 authors say,“Yes, this is a piece of work I am proud to have my name on?”
together with comments that don’t say much about the quality of the reviewers themselves
The orgnization and writing of the paper need to improve. There are some grammar errors need to correct.
Can you explain this part a bit further, but without going into detail.
The reported mean of 7.7 is misleading because it appears that close to half of your participants are scoring below that mean
This paper reads like a woman’s diary, not like a scientific piece of work’
I don’t believe in simulations
and a few desperate cries for help of editors dealing with those reviewers
You will see that Reviewer 2 has slightly missed the point, so please don’t pay too much attention to their comments in your revision.
Feel free to share your worst reviews! (and submit them to this site if you wish)