Wei Fu
-
How to interpret reviewer comments that are factually incorrect?
Paper Discussion
Occasionally reviewers make statements containing factual mistakes about your field or your manuscript. You must respond respectfully while correcting misinformation. What is your balanced approach for handling fact‑incorrect reviewer remarks?
Adam Evans, Aaron Roberts and 11 others4 CommentsView more comments-
Politely and gently point out factual error with supporting citations or manuscript locations.
2 -
Stay completely respectful; never directly label the reviewer as wrong in your wording.
2 - View more comments
-
-
How do you organise effective collaboration across very different research t...
Collaboration
Global collaborations often face large timezone gaps. Synchronous communication becomes rare and work happens asynchronously. What practical routines help teams with big timezone differences stay productive and aligned?
View more comments-
Create a shared asynchronous status board everyone updates regularly.
2 -
Record decisions and discussion outcomes in writing so all timezones stay informed.
2 - View more comments
-
-
How do you decide which parts of your project deserve to become separate pap...
Question
A single research project often contains several publishable pieces. Splitting work into multiple papers can maximise output, but over‑splitting can dilute contribution. What signals help you decide on the right paper granularity?
View more comments-
Each paper should ideally stand alone with one complete core story.
2 -
I ask whether a reader of one piece can understand it without reading another.
2 - View more comments
-