From bias in peer review and unfair allocation of grant funding to sexual harassment and a gender pay gap, the scientific community certainly has a lot of work to do.
Gender and Precarious Research Careers aims to advance the debate on the process of precarisation in higher education and its gendered effects, and springs from a three-year research project across institutions in seven European countries. Examining gender asymmetries in academic and research organisations, this insightful volume focuses particularly on early careers. It centres both on STEM disciplines (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) and SSH (Social Science and Humanities) fields.
Current efforts to make research more accessible and transparent can reinforce inequality within STEM professions.
Despite growing awareness of predatory publishing and research on its market characteristics, the defining attributes of fraudulent journals remain controversial. The authors aimed to develop a better understanding of quality criteria for scholarly journals by analysing journals and publishers indexed in blacklists of predatory journals and whitelists of legitimate journals and the lists’ inclusion criteria.
Following these guiding principles for sharing data can help researchers get ahead.
A new study shows that little teams are more likely to take their research in radically new directions.
This is the first empirical study of major academic journals’ willingness to publish a cohort of comparable and objective correction letters on misreported high-impact studies.
Kelvin Droegemeier starts work two years into an administration facing many challenges.
Advance knowledge in service of equitable and open scholarship is the mission of the Center for Research on Equitable and Open Scholarship. CREOS seeks evidence about the best ways disparate communities can participate in scholarship with minimal bias or barriers.
Invited talk by Jon Tennant delivered at the NFAIS 2019 Annual Conference.
A planned $35-million upgrade could enable LIGO to spot one black-hole merger per day by the mid-2020s.
NISO and NFAIS announced a planned merger yesterday, designed to better serve their members during a time of rapid change.
Collaborating on the development of Texture brings eLife a step closer to its open-source, end-to-end publisher workflow.
A new study suggests that making reviewers' reports freely readable doesn't compromise the peer-review process.
The planet is getting warmer in catastrophic ways. And fear may be the only thing that saves us.
With the membership of NSTC, the main public research funding body in the Republic of Zambia, cOAlition S now has members in Europe, North America, and Africa, and has received further support in the Middle East and Asia, with particular support by China.
Researchers say the policy could intensify existing issues with research quality and misconduct.
Techniques used to analyse data are producing misleading and often wrong results, critics say.
Social science has an image problem - too many findings don't hold up. A new project will crank through 30,000 studies to try to identify red flags.
Many papers in basic biomedical science do not contain the information that is needed to determine what statistical tests were used and to verify the results of these tests.
Fewer than 1 percent of doctorates in math are awarded to African-Americans. Edray Goins, who earned one of them, found the upper reaches of the math world a challenging place.
Computer programming once had much better gender balance than it does today. What went wrong?
By creating journals that put a premium on replicability, grant-funding agencies can revolutionize the publishing landscape.
A two-year study by the University on the status of women and underrepresented minority faculty at Columbia has resulted in a set of proposals on ways to close salary gaps, spur academic advancement and improve the overall work environment.
There has been a fair amount of reactions to the changes being made to Wellcome's open access policy to ensure that no research is behind a paywall. This is how Wellcome are working to address them.
No formal investigations have been conducted into the efficacy or potential influence of reviewer recommendations on editorial decisions, and the impact of this on the expectations and behaviour of authors, reviewers and journal editors. This article addresses key questions about this critical aspect of the peer review submission process.
Many academics have strong incentives to influence policymaking, but may not know where to start. Recent research has examined the ‘how to’ advice in the academic peer-reviewed and grey literatures.
