'One-Size-Fits-All’ Threshold for P Values Under Fire
Scientists hit back at a proposal to make it tougher to call findings statistically significant.
Send us a link
Stanford and MIT Lead Arts and Humanities Ranking
Peking University joins the top 20 of the Times Higher Education subject table for the first time
Misuse of Received Manuscripts by Peer Reviewers
Trust that reviewers will treat manuscripts received for peer review as confidential communications is an essential tenet of peer review. New results suggest that breaches of this trust do occur.
Seven Things I Learned at the 8th International Peer Review Congress
Here's a brief summary of some key takeaways from this year's Peer Review Congress, held every four years. A talk by the Swiss National Science Foundation was especially enjoyed.
A Model for Invasive Alien Species in Europe
Workshop on a growing threat to Europe's biodiversity and the role of Citizen Science and Open Data as a model.
Solid and Liquid Cats, Didgeridoos and Cheese Disgust Scoop Ig Nobel Awards
Scientists from around the globe gathered for annual ceremony celebrating research that ‘first makes you laugh, then makes you think’.
bioRxiv Selects Hypothesis to Enable Annotation on Preprints
Hypothesis and Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory are today announcing the selection of the Hypothesis open source annotation framework for the bioRxiv preprint service as their primary annotation mechanism.
Should Research Funding Be Distributed Equally Among Scientists?
Instead of making scientists compete for grants based on project proposals, research funding could simply be divided equally among all ‘qualified’ researchers, according to a new paper.
Peer Review Week 2017
Transparency in Review, and other innovations - Research in progress blog
How Much Would Each Researcher Receive if Funding Was Distributed Equally?
A paper arguing that researchers could, on average, maintain current PhD student and Postdoc employment levels, and still have at their disposal a moderate to considerable budget for travel and equipment, depeding on the country.
Plan for New Medical Preprint Server Receives a Mixed Response
Some worry that posting unvetted medical manuscripts could cause problems.
The 8th Olympiad of Research on Science & Publishing Begins
Once every 4 years editors, publishers, and meta-researchers assemble in Chicago for the Peer Review Congress - an intense researchfest about "enhancing the quality and credibility of science".
Storytelling and Evidence-Based Policy
A number of authors interested in how to translate evidence into policy identify the importance of policy narrative and argue that advocates of scientific evidence need to tell good stories to grab the attention and appeal to the emotions of policymakers.
The Unhappy Postdoc
A survey of 190 postdocs in North America reveals a surprisingly unhappy postdoc community with low satisfaction with life scores.
Does Born-Digital Mean Rethinking Peer Review?
What kind of peer review is developing to evaluate long-form digital scholarship? A view from AAUP press editors.
The Stress of Academic Publishing
The waiting is, indeed, the hardest part, but some academics cope with it better than others.
Faculty Promotion Must Assess Reproducibility
Research institutions should explicitly seek job candidates who can be frankly self-critical of their work, says Jeffrey Flier.
We Have the Technology to Save Peer Review – Now It Is up to Our Communities to Implement It
We Have the Technology to Save Peer Review – Now It Is up to Our Communities to Implement It
An introspective look at peer review, one we hope will be useful for future discussions on the topic.
Creating Incentives to Address the Replication Crisis in Science
Scientists have few direct incentives to replicate other researchers’ work, including precious little funding to do replications. Can that change?
Making Peer Reviews Citable, Discoverable, and Creditable
Peer review infrastructure will arrive at Crossref in one month.
A Methodological Systematic Review of 'Spin'
More than 26 percent of papers identified as systematic reviews or meta-analyses contained spin. This figure rose to up to 84 percent in papers reporting on nonrandomised trials.
×