How to Make Scientists Into Better Peer Reviewers
From efforts to increase the transparency of the review process to initiatives offering training, there are many attempts underway to make better reviewers out of researchers.
A Rollback of DACA Would Undercut American Science, Too
Without the extension of the program - or a pathway to citizenship - those who know what it’s like to be undocumented say U.S. science could suffer.
An Open Letter to the AAUP: Faculty Authors and "Full Freedom in Publication"
In 1940, the AAUP published a Statement on Academic Freedom. In 2018, it's time for it to be updated--and some items clarified.
Artificial Intelligence Could Identify Gang Crimes—and Ignite an Ethical Firestorm
Artificial Intelligence Could Identify Gang Crimes—and Ignite an Ethical Firestorm
A new algorithm is trying to automate the process of identifying gang crimes. But some scientists warn that far from reducing gang violence, the program could do the opposite by eroding trust in communities, or it could brand innocent people as gang members.
Low Agreement Among Reviewers Evaluating the Same NIH Grant Applications
Low Agreement Among Reviewers Evaluating the Same NIH Grant Applications
No agreement among reviewers regarding the quality of 25 NIH grant applications in either their qualitative or quantitative evaluations.
When Splashy Headlines Become the Goal of Science, the Process Suffers
Internal and external pressure drive a rush toward prestige.
Writing Women in Mathematics into Wikipedia
Reflections upon the problems encountered when writing women in mathematics into Wikipedia.
How to Tackle the Childcare-Conference Conundrum
Four concrete suggestions - for Childcare, Accommodate families, Resources, Establish social networks - are directed toward research societies and conference organizers who are willing to take a leadership role in creating solutions, either incrementally or on a large scale.
A Curious Blindness Among Peer Review Initiatives
Overlooking the need for paid Editorial Office staff hobbles many attempts to reform peer review.
Mental Health Crisis for Grad Students
Study finds "strikingly high" rates of depression and anxiety, with many reporting little help or support from supervisors.
Does Your Code Stand up to Scrutiny?
Nature journals encourage researchers who submit papers that rely on custom software to provide the programs for peer review.
Europe Set to Miss Flagship Open Access Target
Despite some progress, researchers are still reluctant to switch journals because of fears it could hinder their careers.
Learn to Tell Science Stories
What if it is not the concepts described by science fiction that could have the most impact, but the act of storytelling - the creation of scientific narratives - itself?
Meta-Analysis and the Science of Research Synthesis
The accomplishments, limitations, recent advances and directions for future developments in the field of research synthesis.
Perish Not Publish? New Study Quantifies the Lack of Female Authors in Scientific Journals
The Spread of True and False News Online
To understand how false news spreads, Vosoughi et al. used a data set of rumor cascades on Twitter from 2006 to 2017. About 126,000 rumors were spread by ∼3 million people. False news reached more people than the truth; the top 1% of false news cascades diffused to between 1000 and 100,000 people, whereas the truth rarely diffused to more than 1000 people. Falsehood also diffused faster than the truth.
The Science of Fake News
Fake news has a long history, but there are new unanswered scientific questions raised by the proliferation of its most recent, politically oriented incarnation.
Hilarious Academics on Twitter
27 Twitter accounts bringing out the silly, quirky, and fun side of academia, introducing you to a space on Twitter where academics can be casual, friendly, and humorous.
Why Do Female Academics Publish Less Than Their Male Peers?
Editors and peer reviewers impose tougher standards on women. This is evident from the fact that female-authored economics papers take around six months more to go through the review process than male-authored papers. As a result, female academics come to experience peer review as a much tougher process and those who progress on the career ladder adjust their expectations about what is required. Female researchers publish less than their male peers do but what they publish is much more readable and better written.
The Balance Between Bibliometric and Societal Impact
An interview with Kai Chan and his strategies to seek the combination of both kinds of impacts.
×