5 technologies under development at the IBM Research labs.

Science-related Facebook pages draw millions of followers but 'news you can use' posts or ads outnumber ones about scientific discoveries.

How chance determines h-index’s outcome.

An experimental tool for self-publishing on the peer-to-peer web

When it comes to impact assessment, there are things that are easy to measure, and then there are things that we care about. On the divide through the examples of two recent online initiatives from the Canadian federal government.

To beat the stiff competition, highlight your skills in collaboration, teamwork and meeting deadlines.

Amid the sea of male faces -- 37 of them -- was a lone woman, her face partially obscured. She was listed as "not identified."

But female LGBQ students are more likely than their heterosexual peers to stay in STEM, a survey of college seniors across the United States reveals.

Accenture study shows 62% of teenage girls regret not studying science, technology, engineering and maths subjects for longer.

The drug albuterol can provide fast-acting relief to the wheezing and shortness of breath that often accompany an asthma attack but it often fails minority children.

Researcher-centric communication, collaboration and attribution platform powered by blockchain - with proof-of-existence and real-time, permanent, citing for all scientific and scholarly works.

A short list of common issues that can delay a submission. Check your manuscript for these issues, and and then read our advice for how to fix them.

Following the shutdown of Beall’s list, blacklists that warn against questionable publishers are in demand.

After Jeffrey Beall took down his list of predatory journals in January 2017 in order to avoid continued harassment and threats, a small group of scholars and information professionals decided to anonymously rebuild and resurrect that list.

Researchers can submit their work directly from bioRxiv to F1000Research offering more choice and flexibility to authors in deciding when to set preprints to under invited peer review.

A series of talks on robust research practices in psychology and the biomedical sciences, held in Oxford in 2017. Organized by Dorothy Bishop, Ana Todorovic, Caroline Nettekoven and Verena Heise.

Women shouldn't have to shoulder the burden of solving gender inequality on social media: by visibly contradicting stereotypes about female scientists, it is clear that they hope to inspire girls to pursue science and to encourage female scientists to showcase their femininity in our male-dominated workspaces.

A free and open way to track the online buzz around scholarly articles, by Jason Priem.

A flawed article claiming that manuscripts don't change much between being preprints and published articles somehow makes it through peer review unchanged.

Customers question whether paid articles in digital magazines are worth the money.

Public regard for scientists is as strong as ever, but you wouldn't know it. Public trust in scientists has risen over the past three decades in the United Kingdom, even in the post-Brexit era.

New head of Science Europe says he hopes for experiments with grant lottery system and even a basic income for researchers.

Keeping your research data freely available is crucial for open science — and your funding could depend on it.

Women get paid less at every education level and in nearly every major.

To attract more girls to study Stem subjects at university, we need to tackle the stereotypes they are exposed to early on.

China produces the most scientific articles, but lags on other measures. 

Some thoughts on how to approach writing manuscripts based on original biomedical research.

Information about research metrics across disciplines, including how each metric is calculated, where you can find it, and how each should (and should not) be applied.

Editors and peer reviewers impose tougher standards on women. This is evident from the fact that female-authored economics papers take around six months more to go through the review process than male-authored papers. As a result, female academics come to experience peer review as a much tougher process and those who progress on the career ladder adjust their expectations about what is required. Female researchers publish less than their male peers do but what they publish is much more readable and better written.

27 Twitter accounts bringing out the silly, quirky, and fun side of academia, introducing you to a space on Twitter where academics can be casual, friendly, and humorous.