The case for “blinding” to make journal peer review fair seems less and less plausible to me for the long run. It even seems antithetical to ultimately reducing the problems it’s a bandaid solution for.
High price of journals 'placing strain on acceptance' of division of labour between researchers and publishers, says professor.
Thomas Insel's biggest lesson from his shift from NIMH director to Silicon Valley entrepreneur: academic and technology company researchers should partner up.
Paul Shannon, Head of Technology, looks at the costs of running eLife’s own continuous publication platform four months after the launch of eLife 2.0.
Rand Paul wants to add two people to every federal peer-review panel evaluating research proposals, charged with looking for value to taxpayers. Science advocates say idea would politicize federal funding of research.
It sounds almost absurd, but that could be one factor behind the so-called “reproducibility crisis”.
Metrics are notoriously inappropriate for evaluating humanistic scholarship. HumetricsHSS is an initiative to embed metrics with humanistic values.
W. M. Keck Observatory chief scientist to lead investments in astronomy, chemistry, physics, materials science and mathematics research.
Researchers who want professorships are sometimes driven to publish suspect findings.
Reporters and editors at the local news sites joined a union last week. On Thursday, their billionaire owner closed the sites.
The planned overhaul would place new tax burdens on colleges and students, and some critics argue that it could undermine charitable giving to the institutions.
Considerations of open access models that can work across disciplines. The case of ELife, PLoS, and BioOne.
A challenge investigating reproducibility of empirical results submitted to the 2018 International Conference on Learning Representations.
Data from several lines of evidence suggest that the methodological quality of scientific experiments does not increase with increasing rank of the journal.
The Financial Times disclosed that Springer Nature has blocked access in China to at least 1,000 articles from the websites of two of its journals in response to Beijing’s censorship demands.
The latest medical innovation to spring from Aled Edwards’s University of Toronto lab isn’t a new protein structure or potential drug target – it’s a business model.
Huge genetic databases are changing how scientists study disease.
Ideally, we want science and scholarship to be not only available to the general public, but also comprehensible to them. But the challenges to doing so are real, and may vary both by discipline and by study type.
The American Chemical Society was granted an unprecedented injunction which requires search engines and ISPs to block Sci-Hub.
NIH Data Commons Pilot Phase to seek best practices for developing and managing a data commons.
Republican-controlled Congress ordered destruction of vital sea-ice probe.
A survey on open access books, revealed that of the 99 authors, 55.5% self-archived their chapters.
While part of the original motivation of the first research publication in serial form — the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society in 1665 — was to make money, the early history of scholarly publishing is largely one of community subsidy to cover losses or breaking even.
How does open access affect the usage of scholarly books? A white paper by Springer Nature.
Google, Facebook and Microsoft are protesting a looming injunction that would require search engines, ISPs and hosting companies to stop linking to or offering services to several "pirate" sites.
In our institutions of higher education and our research labs, scholars first produce, then buy back, their own content. With the costs rising and access restricted, something's got to give.
