The success rate of discoveries would be improved if we could find out how to innovate.

PhD holders should not underestimate their value to industry and the business sector.

The gravitational waves theorist saw physics as no one else did, but if he was around today his time would be spent chasing grants or tenures.

How to do great research, get it published, and improve health outcomes.

The traditional way of publishing new findings in journals is becoming increasingly outdated and no longer serves the needs of much of science.

If we want to embed equality and diversity in research culture, any future use of metrics to assess research must not adversely affect specific groups or researchers.

It’s rare for scientists to get much systematic or public recognition for their reviewing efforts

Mistakes in peer-reviewed papers are easy to find but hard to fix.

Reproducibility should be at science’s heart. It isn’t. But that may soon change.

The fashion for making employees collaborate has gone too far.

Publishing an open-access paper in a journal can be prohibitively expensive. Some researchers are drumming up support for a movement to change that.

It may not be sexy, but quality assurance is becoming a crucial part of lab life.

Stephan Lewandowsky and Dorothy Bishop explain how the research community should protect its members from harassment, while encouraging the openness that has become essential to science.

What underlies the negative perception about Frontiers?

A white paper written by Leslie Vosshall and Michael Eisen aimed at promoting pre-print use in biomedicine.

A WEF report on the widespread disruption not only to business models but also to labour markets over the next five years.

Two NEJM editors say data sharing should happen symbiotically, not parasitically.

The most prestigious journals publish the least reliable science (at least when looking at the available evidence from experimental fields).

Last year "PLOS ONE" published 10% fewer papers than it did two years ago, but its editors are not alarmed.

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.

Die Menschheit steht vor großen Herausforderungen. Doch das Wissenschaftssystem bleibt starr. Das muss sich ändern.

The vast majority of scientific papers today are published in English. What gets lost when other languages get left out?

There’s more money to be made investing in drugs that will extend cancer patients’ lives by a few months than in drugs that would prevent cancer in the first place.

We asked four researchers who made the news in 2015 what they would change about how science gets done.

When it comes to protecting the scientific literature from bias, the safeguards that academics now use are sorely inadequate.

Researchers are urged to make their work accessible, but simplifying complex ideas doesn’t support great scholarship.

Research can only exist with good and secure funding, but when obtaining funding becomes a dominant part of investigators’ activity, the system has a problem.

Honoring young researchers who champion rigorous, transparent research is a small step towards changing the culture of science.

Too many senior scholars abuse their power when it comes to assigning credit.

Ask not what you can do for reproducibility; ask what reproducibility can do for you.