PEERE is a project funded by the European Union to explore issues around journal and grant peer review, running from 2014 to 2018.

A visualization of 6,975 case studies capturing the work of 50,000 researchers working in 154 institutions and grouped into 36 disciplinary units of assessment.

Move follows controversy over comment pieces and cover page for Science.

Video presenting the new approach of Scientific Foresight in the European Parliament, for anticipating impacts of future techno-scientific trends.

Aside from one retraction, eight articles of ETH Zürich plant biologist Olivier Voinnet have been corrected by the journals so far. Large parts of the scientific community, however, are not exactly satisfied with them.

PLOS has identified a set of established repositories, which are recognized and trusted within their respective communities.

An evaluation of PLOS publishing times.

An overview of the key impact measurement concepts and the services and tools available for measuring impact.

Are you a champion of open science and open data? Mozilla is seeking researchers eager to advance openness in science and data within their institutions.

How does the future for open access look?

This year, 272 journals will receive their first Impact Factor. The JCR will also suppress 39 titles –29 for high rates of self-citation and 10 for “citation stacking”.

On November 14-16, 2015 in Brussels, OpenCon 2015 will feature leading speakers from across the Open Access, Open Education, and Open Data movements.

On June 5 and 6, 2015, Opendata.ch invites researchers and experts, designers, developers, journalists and all people who would like to embrace experimentation with data to participate in our hackdays in Zurich and Lausanne.

This list recounts some prominent retractions that have occurred since 1980.

This glossary is designed to to be a resource to help inform people about the culture of ‘open scholarship’.

JournalGuide brings all sources of journal data together in one place to give authors a simple way to choose the best journal for their research.

Or, how to make physics fun.

It’s widely recognised that the established scholarly publishers skim an awful lot of money off the top of research budgets.

Special Issue on reproducibility in EuroScientist.

With so much new literature published each year, why are authors increasingly citing older papers?

A survey of SciELO users

An awesome list of (large-scale) public datasets on the Internet. (On-going collection)

Navigating the various requirements can be difficult and time consuming for authors. Every funding agency seems to have slightly different specifics to their OA policies and each paper has multiple authors with multiple funding agencies supporting their research.

In theory, science isn't just self-interested. We're all driven by curiosity and pure motives to strive together to unlock the secrets of the universe and solve problems.But it's for others to determine whether or not we've unlocked or solved anything.

The Web was invented to enable scientists to collaborate.

Open access isn't just some "free culture" refrain. It really matters and can save lives.

The Cell paper has been cited 150 times, according to Web of Science, while the Nature paper has been cited 40. The Nature paper has not yet been retracted.

Robert Weinberg, a prominent cancer scientist whose papers often notch hundreds or thousands of citations, has lost a fourth paper, this time a 2009 publication in Cell.

Olivier Voinnet, a researcher at ETH in Zurich is retracting a 2004 paper in The Plant Cell, according to the journal's publisher.

If you are a scientists sharing our concerns you can add your name in the support form on the right.