What if you could peer review the arXiv?
What if you could peer review the arXiv?
What if I told you that you don't need journals to do peer review?
What if I told you that you don't need journals to do peer review?
The Amsterdam Call for Action on Open Science is the key outcome of the two-day conference ‘Open Science.
Is UK science better off in or out of the EU? The arguments are complex and only partially evidence-based. And that’s not surprising.
David Matthews examines the approach of ResearchGate, Academia.edu and Mendeley to profit, user data and open access publishing
It is an unfortunate convention of science that research should pretend to be reproducible; our top tips will help you mitigate this fussy conventionality, enabling you to enthusiastically showcase your irreproducible work.
Elite scientists generally agree on what character traits make for excellent science.
A famous faked study gets proved right—by the people who unmasked it in the first place.
By fetishising mathematical models, economists turned economics into a highly paid pseudoscience
A British scientist successfully appealed against an unfavourable grant review — but the road to victory can be paved with challenges.
Speech by Bjørn Haugstads, State Secretary to the Norwegian Minister of Education and Research
Bemused physicists watch biologists start biorXiv, party likes it's 1991.
A. Hope Jahren on women, research, and life in the lab.
Letter signed by multiple leading scientists to urge the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to increase the value of abstracts in PubMed by including information about authors’ competing interests.
Ideally, in a reviewing process, it is generally easier for referees to make faster and more reliable decisions for high quality papers, which ideally and on average will later attract more citations. Therefore, it is possible that the editorial delay time—the time between dates of submission and acceptance or publication—is correlated to the number of received citations, as has been weakly confirmed by previous studies.
Two high-profile cases in which universities — who by US law are the ones that must open an investigation into misconduct — stonewalled the effort.
Big-name scientists may end up stifling progress in their fields
Do people think that scientists are bad people? Although surveys find that science is a highly respected profession, a growing discourse has emerged regarding how science is often judged negatively.
The advantages of making scientific data available for further analysis are clear, but it could also enable the trawling of data to find significant, or preferred, results.
How can research funders ensure ‘unlucky’ applications are handled more appropriately?
Control, surveillance and thought manipulation: there is an undercurrent of 1984 in today’s academy, doublethinks Eric Blair
Towards a collaborative open database of all available information on all clinical trials
There are plenty of reasons to be upbeat about the prospects for science and research across Africa. The next challenge is to bring more of that evidence and expertise into decision making.
At ScienceOpen, there’s nothing more we like than good news for open science! That’s why we’re happy this week to see ORCID announcing a new partnership with the DFG, the German R…
Although there has been a welcome increase in discussion about gender disparities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), broad participation of women from all backgrounds in academic STEM will not be achieved until institutions are transformed.