The not-quite-stated, awful truth
For all but a small percentage of aspiring researchers, doing a postdoc at a university is a lousy idea because it will neither result in an academic job nor otherwise advance one’s career.
Send us a link
For all but a small percentage of aspiring researchers, doing a postdoc at a university is a lousy idea because it will neither result in an academic job nor otherwise advance one’s career.
Forcing research to fit the mould of high-impact journals weakens it. Hiring decisions should be based on merit, not impact factor.
Ivan Oransky is a medical journalist, global editorial director of MedPage Today and co-founder of Retraction Watch, a site that tracks and reports on retractions in research journals.
We propose steps to help increase the transparency of the scientific method and the reproducibility of research results: specifically, we introduce a peer-review oath and accompanying manifesto.
We propose to use the R-factor, a metric that indicates whether a report or its conclusions have been verified.
How the US position as a global leader in biomedical research is being undermined.
Some ideas on the re-ranking of universities.
Data-Level Metrics (DLMs): NSF-funded project which will pilot a suite of metrics to track and measure data use that can be shared with funders, tenure & promotion committees, and other stakeholders.
Michael Eisen co-founded the Public Library of Science, publisher of open access journals including PLOS ONE.
Germany's Holtzbrinck, which owns Nature publisher Macmillan Science and Education, will combine the majority of its activities with BC Partners' Springer unit.
The European Commission has agreed to retain the role of EU Chief Scientific Adviser, despite the departure of Anne Glover.
Institutions 'unbending' on fee-free demand as talks with Elsevier resume. Meanwhile, a deal that meets the universities’ requirements was made with Springer.
Investigators with substantial, long-term, unrestricted research support may generally hold no more than one NIGMS research grant.
A few professional scientists have found a sneaky way to cheat their way up the career ladder. They evaluate their own research by pretending to be someone else.
The British commentator George Monbiot once compared academic publishers to the media tycoon Rupert Murdoch, concluding that the former were more predatory.
Universities must continue to monitor and track the variety of associated spending related to journal publishing and access, argues Lorraine Estelle. Many universities are forecasting that their AP…
A light-hearted opinion piece about the arbitrariness of academic success.
How a recent "bad luck" cancer study illustrates failure of science journalism.
On the delay in young scientists obtaining NIH grants.
On transparency in the process of grant review.
Evaluative strategies that increase the mean quality of published science may also increase the risk of rejecting unconventional or outstanding work.
On the challenges of crowdfunded science projects.
Comparison of the recall of commonly used online indexers.
Holiday discussion about the future of science and how it might one day be funded.
Data show scores given to grant applications by external reviewers don't correlate with what actually gets funded.
Four conditions that need to be satisfied for a document to be considered a citable piece of scientific work.
Share of research funding going to young scientists is declining.
A guide to the popular, free statistics and visualization software that gives scientists control of their own data analysis.
How using absolute numbers and journal reputation can yield misleading results.
Two of India's science funding agencies are joining the push to make the results of the research they fund freely available to the public.