Send us a link
Openly discussing the history of science, where is has gone wrong, and the incredible efforts individual scientists go to uncover fraud should inspire confidence in its self-correcting nature.
The U.S. presidential election shows how far the political conversation has degenerated from the nation's founding principles of truth and evidence.
New evidence in the battle to control a gene-editing technology that is worth billions.
Without open data, a scientific paper is little more than a statement that, in the author’s opinion, some evidence supports a certain set of claims.
The zoo of bacteria and viruses within each lab animal may be confounding experiments.
Authors of systematic review articles sometimes overlook misconduct and conflicts of interest present in the research they are analyzing, according to a recent study published in BMJ Open.
Richard Morey on thinking about evidence, selling dog food, and how individual scientist can deal with the crisis in the social sciences.
A system of academic endorsement based on blockchain technology would be decoupled from the publication process, which would allow expeditious appraisal of all kinds of scientific output in a transparent manner without relying on any central authority.
Covering sexism and sexual harassment in the sciences and academia may not yet be a full-fledged beat for journalists, but it's getting there.
Ivan Oransky and Adam Marcus praise the growing scrutiny of scientific publications.
On The Natural Selection of Bad Science.
Jean-Paul Chretien and colleagues argue that recent Ebola and Zika virus outbreaks highlight the importance of data sharing in scientific research.
Sanjay Srivastava’s assessment of the state of psychology mixes a certain four-letter word and gallows humor with a desire to raise awareness of important research issues in his field.
A figshare case study of Micah Vandegrift's Digital Humanities research.
New 2016 Top 500 world university rankings conducted by CWCU of Shanghai Jiao Tong University (Academic Ranking of World Universities).
Nonscientists should take part in discussions about research priorities and more.
Not just a competition but a resource that will continue to be useful now and in the future as we tackle improving reproducibility in the sciences.
There needs to be a transparent and openly recorded submission and review process.
A spirit of collective enterprise in scientific research is being replaced by a rush to assign precise credit for who did what.
Encourage girls to explore scientific career paths.
Nobel prize winning ideas are not always accepted by the community. By definition, they are paradigm shifting, revolutionary.
Chancellor Philip Hammond guarantees EU funding beyond date UK leaves the EU. British businesses and universities will have certainty over future funding and should continue to bid for competitive EU funds while the UK remains a member of the EU.
It is clear that the journal impact factor is not effective in predicting future citations of successful authors.
At the ASAPbio Funders’ Workshop (May 24, 2016, NIH), representatives from 16 funding agencies requested that ASAPbio “develop a proposal describing the governance, infrastructure and standards desired for a preprint service that represents the views of the broadest number of stakeholders.” We are now holding a Technical Workshop to advise on the infrastructure and standards for a Central Service (CS) for preprints. ASAPbio will integrate the output of the meeting and community and stakeholder feedback into a proposal to funding agencies this fall. The funders may issue a formal RFA to which any interested parties could apply for funding.
Advancements in the research integrity project launched in 2011.
The OpenTrialsFDA team was selected as a finalist for the Open Science Prize.
American Chemical Society to lead effort to match other disciplines
We present a deeper view of our 2015 financials, covering publishing and non-publishing expenses. As part of our ambition to change how science publishing works, especially among highly selective journals, we hope that being transparent about our costs will help to set a future course for research communication that is efficient and sustainable.
