We Must Demand Evidence of Peer Review
Peer review varies in quality and thoroughness. Making it publicly available could improve it.
Send us a link
Peer review varies in quality and thoroughness. Making it publicly available could improve it.
Three steps that could be taken by funding agencies to support young investigators in more constructive and effective ways: (1) greatly expand the use of the New Innovator/Starting Grants awards, (2) increase the funding of young investigators through requests for applications, and (3) experiment with separate competitions for Early Stage Investigators when awarding traditional investigator-initiated R01 grants.
Sweden is the latest country to hold out on journal subscriptions, while negotiators share tactics to broker new deals with publishers. Inspired by the results of a stand-off in Germany, negotiators from libraries and university consortia across Europe increasingly declare that if they don’t like what publishers offer, they will refuse to pay for journal access at all.
Introductory report for the Knowledge Exchange working group on preprints, based on contributions from the Knowledge Exchange Preprints Advisory Group.
Why do authors continue to cite preprints years after they've been formally published? A citation is much more than a directional link to the source of a document. It is the basis for a system of rewarding those who make significant contributions to public science.
Scientists pride themselves on being keen observers, but many seem to have trouble spotting the problems right under their noses. Those who run labs have a much rosier picture of the dynamics in their research groups than do many staff members working in the trenches.
A meta-analysis combining the most popular university rankings to find out which ones are best, and showing which university offers the best value for the money. Spoiler: Switzerland, for once, is a good deal.
The 2-day eLife Innovation Sprint was aimed at bringing together 'computer people' and 'science people' in order to create novel tools for open science.
Institutions, research funding bodies and publishers must all work together to change the system in the interest of advancing research, says Steven Inchcoombe.
The AI field is increasingly turning to conference publications and free, open-review websites while shunning traditional outlets - sentiments dramatically expressed in a growing boycott of a high-profile AI journal.
On the basis of a survey of 7103 active faculty researchers in nine fields, this paper examines the extent to which scientists disclose prepublication results, and when they do, why?
Neuroscientist Caitlin Vander Weele gives us a crash course on academic Twitter in our new blog post. She highlights the benefits of using social media as a scientist and gives tips on how to optimize the experience.
Just as the peer review system of journal publication is itself an ever-evolving construction, so too are the unspoken rules that govern which scientists share what.
In this era of billionaires and unequal funding, where is research going? And perhaps more importantly, how will our changing resources affect the training, success, and diversity of the scientists of our future?
Michael Eisen is anything but silent. In his career as a scientist, which has included a slapdash U.S. Senate campaign, blog posts, and nearly 39,000 tweets, he has lobbed grenades at the powers that be.
'Devil in the details' when US and European researchers try to work together under Horizon 2020. When it comes to US-European relations, nothing is simple these days.
Reproducibility failures occur even in fields such as mathematics or computer science that do not have statistical problems or issues with experimental design. Suggested policy changes ignore a core feature of the process of scientific inquiry that occurs after reproducibility failures: the integration of conflicting observations and ideas into a coherent theory.
Balancing due process with the academic community's right to know is no easy task, but critics say more could be done to weed out bad actors. Many universities halt investigations after an accused scientist departs, leaving future employers blind to the researcher’s history of allegations.
Findings of a recent Academy of Management report that sought answers to these questions by surveying its 20,000 members and conducting a selection of in-depth interviews with prominent figures.
Male scientists in the United Kingdom received an extra 40 pence for every pound awarded to women, reveals an analysis of cancer research funding over more than a decade.
P Shravan Kumar aka Akiraa launched Research Funders, a platform to connect scientists with potential donors who can help fund their research and projects.
With several members departing and new leadership incoming, the National Science Board used much of its May meeting to reflect on how it has ramped up its engagement on policy matters in recent years. One focus of discussion was how the board has increasingly drawn attention to the emergence of China as a global leader in science and engineering.
Simply adding an ‘open access’ option to the existing prestige-based journal system at ever increasing costs is not the fundamental change publishing needs, says Bianca Kramer and Jeroen Bosman
Some new tools from the Open Access Button.
Catherine Winchester was hired to ferret out errors and establish routines that promote rigorous research.