The manuscript-editing marketplace
A peer-to-peer website aims to disrupt the author-services industry.
Italian scientists protest ’serious neglect’ of research
Researchers gathered at Sapienza University of Rome last week to discuss the cuts in Italy's research budget.
Good scientist or successful academic? You can't be both
Reflecting on the plight of the early career scholar prompts Xenia Schmalz to draw up a research manifesto.
The world’s top universities for attracting industry funding
Times Higher Education World University Rankings data reveal the 20 best institutions based on private-sector investment per academic
International collaboration 'crucial' for universities
Universities need to expand international engagement to remain competitive, according to a report by Digital Science.
Psychology Is in Crisis Over Whether It’s in Crisis
The psychology establishment is fighting back against an attack on its reliability. But it might be letting emotion get in the way.
About 40% of economics experiments fail replication survey
Compared with psychology, the replication rate "is rather good," researchers say
Psychology’s reproducibility problem is exaggerated – say psychologists
Reanalysis of last year's enormous replication study argues that there is no need to be so pessimistic.
A Bayesian Perspective on the Reproducibility Project: Psychology
We revisit the results of the recent Reproducibility Project: Psychology by the Open Science Collaboration. We compute Bayes factors—a quantity that can be used to express comparative evidence for an hypothesis but also for the null hypothesis—for a large subset ( N = 72) of the original papers and their corresponding replication attempts. In our computation, we take into account the likely scenario that publication bias had distorted the originally published results. Overall, 75% of studies gave qualitatively similar results in terms of the amount of evidence provided. However, the evidence was often weak (i.e., Bayes factor < 10). The majority of the studies (64%) did not provide strong evidence for either the null or the alternative hypothesis in either the original or the replication, and no replication attempts provided strong evidence in favor of the null. In all cases where the original paper provided strong evidence but the replication did not (15%), the sample size in the replication was smaller than the original. Where the replication provided strong evidence but the original did not (10%), the replication sample size was larger. We conclude that the apparent failure of the Reproducibility Project to replicate many target effects can be adequately explained by overestimation of effect sizes (or overestimation of evidence against the null hypothesis) due to small sample sizes and publication bias in the psychological literature. We further conclude that traditional sample sizes are insufficient and that a more widespread adoption of Bayesian methods is desirable.
This renowned mathematician is bent on proving academic journals can cost nothing
This renowned mathematician is bent on proving academic journals can cost nothing
New startups like this one are trying to disrupt traditional academic publishing.
Is the peer-review system broken?
Is the peer-review system broken?
A look at the PLoS ONE paper on a hand designed by “the Creator”
Paper that says human hand was 'designed by Creator' sparks concern
Paper that says human hand was 'designed by Creator' sparks concern
Apparently creationist research prompts soul searching over process of editing and peer review.
Lab life: Lone-parent scientist : Naturejobs
Limited institutional resources mean that single parents often need a network of support to further their scientific careers.
What makes elite academics move?
Children’s ages, peer environment quality, and recent funding affect decisions to move to new institutions, a new study suggests
Women under-represented in world’s science academies
Fewer than half of academies have policies in place to boost gender equality in membership.
Benefits and Implications of EU and Global Collaboration by UK Universities - Digital Science
Benefits and Implications of EU and Global Collaboration by UK Universities - Digital Science
A report on international academic collaboration across the UK research base and on the implications of EU and global collaboration for universities, research assessment and the economy.
Saving science from the scientists
Is science quite as scientific as it's supposed to be? After years of covering science in the news, Alok Jha began to wonder whether science is as rigorous as it should be.
The open research value proposition: How sharing can help researchers succeed
The open research value proposition: How sharing can help researchers succeed
A review on the open citation advantage, media attention for publicly available research, collaborative possibilities, and special funding opportunities to show how open practices can give researchers a competitive advantage.
Statisticians issue warning over misuse of P-values
Policy statement aims to halt missteps in the quest for certainty: the misuse of the P value is contributing to the number of research findings that cannot be reproduced warns the American Statistical Association.
The scientist's dilemma: can you be a parent, a partner, a friend #AndAScientist?
Ban academics talking to ministers? We should train them to do it
Ben Goldacre on why a ban on researchers speaking to politicians and policymakers fails the taxpayers who fund them
Calculus Is So Last Century
Tianhui Michael Li and Allison Bishop write about the overemphasis on calculus in high school and college math courses. Statistics, linear algebra and algorithmic thinking are more valuable in the digital age.
The 20 best science images of the year?
From multicoloured scans of the human body, to vivid photos of creatures up close - the finalists of the annual Wellcome Image Awards.
Science is a major plank in China’s new spending plan
New Chinese 5-year plan promises 2.5% R&D:GDP ratio by 2020, up from 2.05% in 2014.
A Multi-dimensional Investigation of the Effects of Publication Retraction on Scholarly Impact
A Multi-dimensional Investigation of the Effects of Publication Retraction on Scholarly Impact
How do retractions influence the scholarly impact of retracted papers, authors, and institutions; and how does this influence propagate to the wider academic community through scholarly associations?
×