Can too much science be a bad thing?
Growth in scientific publishing as a barrier to science communication.
Send us a link
Faking it
In the face of routine rejection, many scientists must learn to cope with the insidious beast that is impostor syndrome.
High Impact, Fast Decisions and Reasonable Rejection Rates
Rejection rates in Frontiers journals are around ~27%, most manuscripts are published within 3 months, and yet, Frontiers’ citations rates are amongst the very highest.
Repetitive flaws
Scientists who submit grant applications to the NIH will be required to explain the scientific premise behind their proposals and defend the quality of their experimental designs.
Media coverage and journal press releases associated with high-impact medical journals
Media coverage and journal press releases associated with high-impact medical journals
The design of clinical studies whose results are published in high-impact medical journals is not associated with the likelihood or amount of ensuing news coverage.
From frontier research to innovation
ERC funds 135 Proof of Concept grants, a press release.
The peer reviewers’ openness initiative
A new initiative published this week outlines how scientists can make a change to open science practices at an individual level.
Journals to solve 'John Smith' common name problem by requiring author IDs
In an open letter some of the largest academic publishers and scientific societies are announcing that they will not just encourage, but ultimately require, researchers to sign up with ORCID.
The 5-minute journal submission
Pathogens & Immunity promises a quick submission procedure, since it provides a reasonable flexibility about the length of the papers and authors are welcome to include reviews from other journals and their responses.
Journals give more publicity to 'weak science'
Analysis of seven prominent medical journals finds randomised controlled trials are far less likely to receive a press release than weaker observational studies.
Data sharing
Two NEJM editors say data sharing should happen symbiotically, not parasitically.
The Future of Jobs
A WEF report on the widespread disruption not only to business models but also to labour markets over the next five years.
Coupling pre-prints and post-publication peer review for fast, cheap, fair, and effective science publishing
Coupling pre-prints and post-publication peer review for fast, cheap, fair, and effective science publishing
A white paper written by Leslie Vosshall and Michael Eisen aimed at promoting pre-print use in biomedicine.
How scientists are doing a bait-and-switch with medical data
Researchers are “choosing their lottery numbers after seeing the draw”, making medicine less reliable - and respected journals are letting them do it.
Insider's view of faculty search kicks off discussion online
A Harvard professor reveals how his hiring committee whittles down the pile of job applications.
Selecting for impact: new data debunks old beliefs
One of the strongest beliefs in scholarly publishing is that journals seeking a high impact factor should be highly selective. There is evidence showing this is wrong.
Why the referees' reports I receive as an editor are so much better than the reports I receive as an author?
Why the referees' reports I receive as an editor are so much better than the reports I receive as an author?
Authors tend to attribute manuscript acceptance to their own ability to write quality papers and simultaneously to blame rejections on negative bias in peer review, displaying a self-serving attributional bias.
Public data archiving in ecology and evolution
This paper highlights key guidelines to help authors increase their data’s reuse potential and compliance with journal data policies.
Wikiometrics: a new, wikipedia-based ranking system
This paper presents Wikiometrics: the derivation of metrics and indicators from Wikipedia.
For female scientists, mixed funding results at US agencies
A new study by a congressional watchdog agency finds that female scientists are less likely than men to receive research grants from the U.S. government.
When teamwork doesn't work for women
New evidence suggests that the underrepresentation of women reflects a systemic bias in that marketplace: a failure to give women full credit for collaborative work done with men.
Singapore lavishes big money on its scientists
Science spending in Singapore is set to surge by 18%.
World's most international universities 2016
Times Higher Education World University Rankings data reveal the top 200 most outward-looking institutions.
Cashing in on transparency in science
$1000 to each of the first 1000 scientists preregistering their protocols with Nosek's Center for Open Science.
Peer evaluation of science
This is a proposal for a system for evaluation of the quality of scientific papers by open review of the papers through a platform inspired by StackExchange.
As PLOS cedes some ground, a movement gathers steam
Last year "PLOS ONE" published 10% fewer papers than it did two years ago, but its editors are not alarmed.
Do "top" journals attract "too good to be true" results?
The most prestigious journals publish the least reliable science (at least when looking at the available evidence from experimental fields).
The world's most influential scientific minds
Highly Cited Researchers in 2015 according to Thomson Reuters.
Seven actionable strategies for advancing women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine
Seven actionable strategies for advancing women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine
A shortlist of recommendations to promote gender equality in science and stimulate future efforts to level the field.
×