Send us a link
If you want to explore things you haven’t explored, having people who look just like you and think just like you is not the best way. We must see the forest, thinks Scott Page collegiate professor of complex systems, and author of the book book "The Diversity Bonus".
New tools for building interactive figures and software make scientific data more accessible, and reproducible.
Scientists around the globe nowadays regularly take to the internet to scrutinize research after it’s been published — including to run their own analyses of the data and spot mistakes or fraud.
Ali Kaya says he used science to stay sane during his incarceration.
Poorer performance found to be based on less positive evaluation of female principal investigators, not differences in the quality of science
But female scientists suffer when their research proposals are judged primarily on the strength of their CVs.
A small group of fewer than 30 universities are having a bigger impact on the inventions driving global economic growth than the world’s major industrialised nations.
For the first 2 years of my Ph.D. program, my primary adviser was always available when I needed help, promptly responding to emails and meeting with me when questions arose. But that abruptly changed when he went on sabbatical and left the country.
Study finds that a given discipline's perceived gender bias plays the biggest role in whether women choose to major in it.
Alphabet, the parent company of Google, is launching a new company under the Alphabet umbrella. It's called Chronicle, and the new company wants to apply the usual Google tenets of machine learning and cloud computing to cybersecurity.
‘Scientific’ eugenics is on the rise, and grabbing a foothold in respected journals. The claim that these theories are a credible part of a general discussion should worry us all.
Research into jobs finds men’s dominance in IT and biotech is reversing trend towards equality.
Conferences on Peer Review have been held every 4 years since 1989 to present research into the quality of publication processes. The 8th International Congress on Peer Review and Scientific Publication was held in Chicago in September 2017.
A new online tool measures the reproducibility of published scientific papers by analyzing data about articles that cite them.
As preprints in medicine are debated, data on how preprints are used, cited, and published are needed. This study by John P.A. Ioannidis evaluates views and downloads and Altmetric scores and citations of preprints and their publications.
A model of the way opinions spread reveals how propagandists use the scientific process against itself to secretly influence policy makers.
Switzerland appears to have three key factors for success in getting a surprisingly high proportion of its researchers’ articles cited in the scientific literature: it’s a small country, it’s research investment is large compared to other countries, and importantly, its hosting of the Large Hadron Collider is a drawcard for collaborative research.
Replication is not enough. Marcus R. Munafò and George Davey Smith state the case for triangulation.
Preliminary coalition agreement pledges increase in research funding to 3.5% of GDP.
The nearly 60,000-member American Geophysical Union took the bold step of revising its ethics policy to treat harassment, discrimination and bullying as scientific misconduct, with the same types of penalties for offenders. Other scientific organizations have not adopted that standard.
Nobel laureate Shinya Yamanaka suggested at a press conference that Kyoto University in Japan could ask him to resign over fraud committed by one of his center’s scientists.
It’s not true that efforts to reform research may “end up destroying new ideas before they are fully explored.” In defense of the replication movement.
The US biomedical research agency NIH says it is dedicating $190 million over the next six years to researchers conducting gene-editing experiments, such as those with the powerful CRISPR technique.
Women are significantly under-represented as last authors on high-quality research papers, according to a recent analysis.
A study that examines the publication bias due to authors’ reputation shows that more reputed authors were less likely to be rejected with negative reviews, and that journal-specificities were important but never completely reversed this outcome.
