Here, I would like to remind you that you must pay attention to these four minefields when evaluating job titles, so as not to fall into them and affect your career development.
First of all, we need to be wary of the "personal likes and dislikes" of the judges. Some judges may be influenced by personal factors and have biases against certain scholars, experts, or a particular study, resulting in unfair evaluation results. Therefore, when submitting a job title, we should try our best to avoid touching on topics that may cause controversy, such as politics, religion, race, etc., so as not to cause unnecessary trouble.
Second, don't go overboard with the pursuit of "perfection**Sometimes, in order to cater to the tastes of the judges, academics spend a lot of time and energy writing**, but in reality this can lead to the article becoming more mediocre and lacking in innovation and breakthroughs. Therefore, we should aim for high-quality articles, not for quantity.
Also, don't ignore "relationships". In the process of judging a title, it is sometimes necessary to build a good relationship with the judges in order to get more support. However, this does not mean that we can tolerate unfair evaluations by judges, and we should always maintain an impartial attitude and avoid any behavior that may affect fairness.
Finally, don't rely too much on "recommendations from others." Although the referee's opinion may have an impact on the judges, we should always maintain our own judgment, rationally analyze the referee's opinion, and make the final decision.
In short, we must be vigilant when evaluating job titles, avoid falling into these four minefields, and learn to think independently, analyze rationally, and make choices that are most in line with our own interests.