opinion articles
Send us a link
In this post, Mark Hahnel presents findings from the largest continuous survey of academic attitudes to open data and suggests that as well promoting data sharing, it may also have inadvertently fed into the publish or perish culture of research.
It's not about foreign trolls, filter bubbles or fake news. Technology encourages us to believe we can all have first-hand access to the 'real' facts - and now we can't stop fighting about it.
When I sat down to think about what to say during this panel entitled "Are there ethical limits to what science can achieve or should pursue", I couldn't help but feel intellectually stuck in three paradoxes, paradoxes that I think animate our condition today, and that I take as a point of departure for my talk. First. Alongside the unprecedented potential of science and technology to solve complex global challenges, there is a perpetual threat of a catastrophe: from the atomic bomb to chemical,
Universities are increasingly recording lectures, but academics are wary of being spied on or made obsolete.
The deal, which is expected to close in early 2020, further cements Ex Libris as the leader in the library systems marketplace and can be expected to put added pressure on OCLC.
Beneath all "fake news", misinformation, disinformation, digital falsehoods and foreign influence lies society's failure to teach its citizenry information literacy: how to think critically about the deluge of information that confronts them in our modern digital age.
Researchers from racial and ethnic groups that are under-represented in US geoscience are the least likely to be offered opportunities to speak at the field's biggest meeting.
It's a tale for all time. What might be the greatest scam in history or, at least, the one that threatens to take history down with it. Think of it as the climate-change scam that beat science, big time. Scientists have been seriously investigating the subject of human-made climate change since the late 1950s and political leaders have been discussing it for nearly as long. In 1961, Alvin Weinberg, the director of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, called carbon dioxide one of the "big problems"
Most agencies claim a 100 per cent pass rate with zero risk of being found out. New laws are being drafted to target contract cheating in Australia.
The market model in higher education has created an intellectual precariat who are right to fight back.
Can journals help to “protect” the scientific community and the public from unscrupulous reanalysis of data?
A recent opinion paper by Richard Poynder offers analysis and prognostication with regard to the current state and future prospects of the open access movement.
In this second article to mark Nature's 2019 graduate survey, respondents call for more one-to-one support and better career guidance.
Scientists working on the issue have often said that, once upon a time, they assumed, if they did their jobs, politicians would act upon the information. That, of course, hasn’t happened.
Whether or not "the foundations and the practice of statistics are in turmoil",1 it is wise to question methods whose misuse has been lamented for over a century.
"No matter how much I did or how good my work was, it was never going to be enough."
The scientific literature is riddled with bad charts and graphs, leading to misunderstanding and worse. Avoiding design missteps can improve understanding of research.
Tamara Yakaboski describes ways you can set boundaries that support your personal life and professional needs.
University researchers outside the EU who may not otherwise have access to research articles should not be excluded based on the actions of their government.
Tenured and tenure-track faculty are called upon to combat an incremental erosion of faculty governance.
Discover the world's best science and medicine | Nature.com
Coffee breaks are a ritualistic part of work life in Europe, a practice this opinion piece suggests would benefit scientists in North America.
Michael Eisen, eLife's Editor-in-Chief, reflects on lessons learned from a recent peer-review trial, and describes how eLife aims to make peer review more effective.
Mark Israel explores the ethics of self-plagiarism and asks, when is it right to reproduce social research?
Inspired by the University of Cambridge Data Champion programme, we have built a community of Data Champions to advocate for good research data management (RDM) practice within all university faculties at TU Delft. Currently, we have 47 active members and the number is increasing.
One of the major causes of the gender pay gap, according to experts, is the "motherhood penalty," where women are penalized in various ways in the job market after having children. One solution to the gap is emerging among researchers: non-transferable paternity leave for men.
Everything we have gained by opening content and data will be under threat if we allow the enclosure of scholarly infrastructures. We propose a set of principles by which Open Infrastructures to support the research community could be run and sustained.
Andy Stirling describes a new project aiming to help science and innovation serve global goals.
