What Scientists Should Focus on — and Fear — Under Trump
Nine experts reflect on where researchers should direct their efforts during the next US administration.
Nine experts reflect on where researchers should direct their efforts during the next US administration.
It's a common complaint among academics: today's researchers are publishing too much, too fast. But just how fast is the mass of scientific output actually growing?
Entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley live by the motto of “Fail fast, fail often." Scientists would do well to likewise embrace failure.
We surveyed 2,000 researchers and practitioners about what they want from academic societies; here’s what they told us.
A survey focusing on the functions and working process of consortia, as well as on the conditions of contracts for big deals concerning scientific periodicals, databases, and e-books. The results of the survey show that consortia broadly represent the interests of relevant stakeholders from the university and library sectors and are largely driven by researchers’ needs.
A bit more than a month ago, I arrived in Ann Arbor, Michigan, to spend my summer working with some of the wonderful data sets being collected at the Institute for Social Research of the University of Michigan and to enjoy the unique flair of a US college town (why does it smell like weed everywhere?)
In the quest for the research money it is more important how researchers build their collaboration network than what publications they produce and whether they are cited.
In 1942, the US Book Republication Program permitted American publishers to reprint "exact reproductions" of Germany's scientific texts without payment; seventy-five years later, the fate of this scientific knowledge forms the basis of a "natural experiment" analysed by Barbara Biasi and Petra Moser.
Completing a Marie Curie Fellowship does have beneficial impacts on a researcher’s career prospects. These positive effects are more marked for academic researchers, while there is room for improving collaboration and mutual benefits with the private sector.
More than 2,000 researchers from a variety of disciplines contributed to a survey conducted by Elsevier and the Publishing Research Consortium.
Report based on four workshops organized by the initiators of Science in Transition in the spring of 2013.
The inconvenient truth is that scientists can achieve fame and advance their careers through accomplishments that do not prioritize the quality of their work.
Like junior doctors, early career biomedical researchers have an issue with contracts (or lack of them). So why don’t we strike too?
Accounting for audience gender ratio, men asked 1.8 questions for each question asked by a woman.
Answers of the annual Edge.org question posed to leading thinkers and scientists.
You’ll find communities thirsty for your findings – and a space to demonstrate measurable ‘impact’ to your heart’s content.
The reality of academia is stifling the passion and creativity needed both to enjoy science, and to do it well.
Groups of authors citing each other is becoming an issue in scientific publishing. With a new approach, researchers discuss how to identify the problem.
The production, archival, and sharing of data may actually be a more effective way to contribute to the advancement of scientific knowledge.
New citation analyses reveal a who’s who of the most impactful scientific researchers.
Rather than repealing or replacing the impact factor, its producers should rename it to reflect its intended function more accurately.
A law that aimed to stimulate the creation of spin-offs hasn't had much effect.
Discovery is the pathway to context. Context of an article is all about how research fits into increasingly complex domains, and using structured networks to decipher its value. With the power of the internet at our disposal, putting research in context should be of key importance in a world where there is ever more research being published that is impossible to manually filter.
Women outnumber men in a raft of science courses – but when they start their careers, they find many insurmountable barriers.
Why breaking down walls between different academic disciplines could enhance our understanding of why research evidence does − or doesn’t − make it into policy.
Retractions of scientific papers have recently been in the spotlight. Unfortunately, the interpretation of statistics about them is often flawed. Evidence suggests that retractions have grown not because of rising misconduct, but because scientists have become more aware of and responsive against fraudulent and flawed research.
While postdocs are necessary for entry into tenure-track jobs, they do not enhance salaries in other job sectors over time.