Send us a link
Scientific research can be a daunting career choice for women of colour, according to a recent survey which found they face a "barrage of brief, everyday racial slights" at work.
Scientists introduced credible climate change to the world in 1979, but it's taken decades for their message to sink in.
Most plant life survived the nuclear disaster at Chernobyl - and they have a lack of legs to thank for it.
Open access publishing still profits publishers, with little added value for researchers.
The Global State of Young Scientists Africa project investigates the challenges that shape the career trajectories of young African scientists.
There are many reasons why scientists collaborating with artists makes sense, now more than ever.
Key areas of focus for tweaking peer review include making journal editors more directive in the process, rewarding reviewers, and improving accountability of editors, reviewers and authors.
Mobilising value from science and technology needs help from thinkers, designers, makers, policymakers, and enablers - and this expertise often sits in the humanities, arts and social sciences domain.
The young membership, frequency of elections and relaxed networks in science societies may provide vital positive influence for female promotion in STEM.
Questionable research practices are not fraud, and they're not cause for panic. But they do give us some hints about how we can make science more robust.
The privacy backlash over Cambridge Analytica and Facebook may lead to explosive consequences for academics.
Research is the foundation for evidence-based policies. But because of funding prohibitions, there's little US research to inform the contentious debate around gun violence and gun control.
Right now, for the second time since 1931, there is no minister directly responsible for science in Australia.
When rewards such as funding of grants or publication in prestigious journals emphasize novelty at the expense of testing previously published results, science risks developing cracks in its foundation.
Universities in New Zealand spent close to US$15 million on subscriptions to just four publishers in 2016, data that was only released following a request to the Ombudsman.
One of the best ways to shape public policy is for experts to submit detailed, technical information through the public comment process.
It might feel like rocket science, but scientists need to get better at explaining things to people outside academia.
In our institutions of higher education and our research labs, scholars first produce, then buy back, their own content. With the costs rising and access restricted, something's got to give.
How is a scientific article accepted for publication in an academic journal? What is the role of peer reviewers? Where does the system go astray?
Could the real open access please stand up? If more research was published according to true open access principles, we'd see better application of evidence for everyone's benefit.
