Min Chen
-
Should journal peer‑review reports require explicit competing‑interest state...
Paper Discussion
Authors must submit competing‑interest disclosures, yet many journals do not require reviewers to submit formal conflict‑of‑interest statements alongside their review reports. Would mandatory reviewer COI disclosure improve peer‑review trustworthiness?
Mei Han, Matthew Wilson and 79 others4 CommentsView more comments-
Mandatory reviewer COI would surface hidden professional or competitive conflicts.
4 -
Extra administrative burden would fall onto reviewers and journal editorial offices.
4 - View more comments
-
-
Opinion: Should conference abstract submissions require access to at least p...
Paper Discussion
Occasionally researchers submit conference abstracts built purely around planned future work, with zero real preliminary data yet collected. Some people argue this practice should be discouraged. Where do you stand on abstracts based entirely on proposed future experiments?
View more comments-
Abstracts built purely on future plans carry high risk of presentation with no actual results.
2 -
But early‑concept abstracts can be valuable for sharing research‑in‑progress ideas.
2 - View more comments
-
-
The tension between research novelty and research soundness in top venues
Paper Discussion
Top conferences often reward novel ideas, but strong novelty does not always come with rigorous validation. Meanwhile, very sound but incremental work may be perceived as less exciting. How should researchers balance novelty and soundness in the same paper?
View more comments-
The strongest papers pair a genuinely new idea with thorough validation of it.
2 -
Novelty without sound evidence quickly loses credibility among reviewers.
2 - View more comments
-
