Refereeing

A referee or reviewer of a research paper is someone asked, by an editor of a journal to which the paper has been submitted, to recommend whether the paper is worthy of publication, and, if so, how it might be improved. Worthiness of publication requires at least part of the work to be all of correct, interesting, and original.

I suspect there are many authors who have the divided feelings that I have toward the review process. There's a piece of my ego that wants to be told my submission is perfect. On the other hand (I have never submitted a research paper that was perfect), an author who heeds the constructive criticism of a well-written review ends up with a better paper. So, what does an author, and for that matter, a journal, need from a referee?