Evidence from Web of Science showing that English is increasingly being used as the dominating language from natural sciences and social sciences to arts and humanities.
232 new predatory open-access publishers over 2016.
One of the watchwords of politics in 2016 was the epidemic of “fake news” — a catch-all term encompassing propaganda, misinformation, disinformation and hoaxing — impinging on the presidential campaign. But let’s not overlook its spread in the spheres of science and medicine.
Reading popular science articles causes non-scientists to overrate their expertise, research finds
Neuroskeptic« No Need To Worry About False Positives in fMRI?What Happens to Rejected Papers?By Neuroskeptic | January 3, 2017 2:43 pm32The pain of rejection is one that every scientist has felt: but what happens to papers after they’re declined by a journal?In a new study, researchers Earnshaw et al. traced the fate of almost 1,000 manuscripts which had been submitted to and rejected by ear, nose and throat journal Clinical Otolaryngology between 2011 to 2013.
Publication bias, in which positive results are preferentially reported by authors and published by journals, can restrict the visibility of evidence against false claims and allow such claims to be canonized inappropriately as facts.
Articles with more narrative abstracts are cited more often.
There's quite a paradox when it comes to our health data. Most of us still cannot readily look at it, but there’s been an epidemic of cybercriminals and thieves hacking and stealing this most personal information. By Eric Topol.
A current debate about conflicts of interest related to biomedical research is to question whether the focus on financial conflicts of interest overshadows “nonfinancial” interests that could put scientific judgment at equal or greater risk of bias.
Searching Google Scholar in 16 languages revealed that 35.6% of 75,513 scientific documents on biodiversity conservation published in 2014 were not in English.
This map shows that across Africa, India, Central America and parts of the Middle East, people are more likely to believe that one of the “bad effects” of science is that it “breaks down ideas of right and wrong”.
Debates over climate change and genome editing present the need for researchers to venture beyond their comfort zones to engage with citizens — and they should receive credit for doing so.
There are a few red flags to look out for when reading about new scientific discoveries that can help you spot dodgy or unreliable work.
Evading science communication simply because it is difficult, time-consuming or not important enough reflects more on how much scientists value their own work and its place in posterity.
Science popularization inclines laypeople to underrate their dependence on experts.
Fixing problems in the academic job market by reducing the number of PhDs would homogenise the sector, argues Tom Cutterham.
Highly productive researchers have significantly higher probability to produce top cited papers.
The world's largest scholarly journal, PLOS ONE, is seeing fewer and fewer researchers publish their work in it as the open-access publishing market evolves.
We wanted to share with you some of the awesome science innovations and disruptors from the last year. This is our list.
In Germany, negotiations between scientific publishing company Elsevier and a consortium of hundreds of universities, technical schools, research institutes, and public libraries stalled in December 2016. As a result, more than 60 institutions have lost their online access to Elsevier's journals effective 1 January, although some can still access archived articles published before that date. The price of the journals is only part of the problem.
Answers of the annual Edge.org question posed to leading thinkers and scientists.
Principles promote access to Federal government-supported scientific data and research findings for international scientific cooperation
Groups of authors citing each other is becoming an issue in scientific publishing. With a new approach, researchers discuss how to identify the problem.
