With competition for research funding approaching an all-time high, experts reveal their top tips and tricks.

What happens when an experiment is correct, but it's really hard to replicate? Are there research results that are accurate but not reproducible?

The scholarly process is ridden with single points of failures at all stages.

10 stories from users of the Open Access Button on why they need research to be freely available.

At the Researcher to Reader conference, a volunteer project called Project Cupcake was launched to define a new suite of indicators to help researchers judge publishers, rather than the other way around.

Exploring the diverse pathways traveled by science, engineering, and health doctorates as they progress through their careers.

Continuous data validation, as a service.

Charlie Rapple highlights the case of Diego Gómez, a Columbian researcher facing prison for sharing someone else's thesis via Scribd.

Relying just on numbers to assess gender equality is insufficient because companies and researchers are smart enough to game the system.

An amusing case of plagiarism in a paper about plagiarism.

In this interview, we have a discussion with the co-founder of PaperHive, Alexander Naydenov about the impact PaperHive has had on ESL authors.

The imprimatur bestowed by peer review has a history that is both shorter and more complex than many scientists realize.

While preprints have been around since before arXiv.org launched in 1991, fields outside of physics are starting to push for more early sharing of research data, results and conclusions.

The business of scholarship.

A list of people to follow on the preprints subject.

Recently, our colleagues at OpenAIRE have published a systematic review of ‘Open Peer Review’ (OPR). As part of this, they defined seven consistent traits of OPR, which we thought sounded like a remarkably good opportunity to help clarify how peer review works at ScienceOpen. At ScienceOpen, we have over 31 million article records all available for …

Which platforms exist? Does it work? And what is funded?

A brief summary of the main citation indicators used today.

Re-structuring presentation programmes could make meetings more accessible.

What policymakers want from scientists, and what were the implications for synthesising evidence in ways that meet policy needs?

A call to simplify an overly complicated process

Empowering the Next Generation to Advance Open Access, Open Education and Open Data.

Starting this year, I will stop traveling to any speaking engagements on open science (or, more generally, infrastructure reform), as long as these events do not entail a clear goal for action.

Author survey shows that publication speed and the ability to share a variety of research outputs are the primary reasons why authors publish on the Wellcome Open Research publishing platform.

Figshare in New Partnership with ORCID to showcase its resources, documentation, staff contributions, and other publicly available materials.

In recent years, librarians have become very concerned about so-called predatory practices associated with some open access publishers. These practices, while concerning, are no where near as harmful to the academic mission as are the practices at Elsevier. We are like that metaphorical frog being slowly boiled.

Reflections on Data Sharing at PLOS ONE

Implications for researchers preprinting their work in terms of precedence, visibility and citation impact, and manuscript editing. Researchers that preprint their work have a citation boost ranging from 83% to 269%.

The report from SpotOn, 'What might peer review look like in 2030?' has now been published. This blog contains a section on the history of peer review from Frank Norman. Read the full report from SpotOn 2016 here.

And why is it important?