Despite vast increases in the time and money spent on research, progress is barely keeping pace with the past. What went wrong?

Progress has been made towards reducing the 85% of wasted effort in medical research-and the huge amounts of money misspent and harm caused to patients - but there's still a long way to go, say Paul Glasziou and Iain Chalmers.  

Biochemist Lynn Kamerlin tells Nature why she has coordinated an open letter - signed by more than 950 scientists - objecting to Plan S.

A blog about the science of human behavior and the human behavior of scientists.

The tech-funded science awards are attempting to bring glory to basic research, but so far they have done little to challenge the status quo.

A look at the system's weaknesses, and possible ways to combat them.

How can research produce more value in the absence of coordination? An opinion piece by Daniel Ropers, Chief Executive Officer of Springer Nature.

An Open Letter in response to Plan S, signed by >600 researchers from all ranks, ranging from masters students & ECRs to full professors, department heads, institute directors, and Nobel laureates, from both cOAlition S countries and beyond.

I counted women and men in a bunch of magazine issues, made some graphs… and then got stuck. I wanted to tell people about these numbers, but how could I explain them? Did they actually show anything that wasn’t already obvious?

On Ada Lovelace Day, we should rethink access to scientific fields, says researcher Jess Wade.

Scientists receive too little peer-review training. Here's one method for effectively peer-reviewing papers, says Mathew Stiller-Reeve.

A former dean chronicles the challenges of returning to full-time teaching.

To assess whether research is relevant to society, ask the stakeholders, say Catherine Durose, Liz Richardson and Beth Perry.

We suggest that moving from an authorship to a contributorship model would better reflect the many and varied contributions to large, complex, long-term and management-intensive projects in modern science.

The prize-awarding academies are making changes to their secretive nomination processes to tackle bias, but some say the measures don’t go far enough.

Seven researchers and campaigners tell Nature how Britain’s break-up with the EU is affecting research.

A Cornell food scientist’s downfall could reveal a bigger problem in nutrition research.

Peter Kraker on Google Dataset Discovery, the open science movement, and his #DontLeaveItToGoogle campaign.

The fall of a prominent food and marketing researcher may be a cautionary tale for scientists who are tempted to manipulate data and chase headlines.

How to step out from the shadow of your principal investigator.

Considering the future of research assessment, Elizabeth Gadd outlines how she believes research evaluation could be made better, fairer, and more meaningful. The resulting seven guiding principles…

A recent investigation led by an international group of journalists raised concerns over the scale of the problem of deceptive publishing practices, but the problem of predatory publishing was overstated while at the same time discrediting open access publishing.

Researchers should embrace negative results instead of accentuating the positive, which is one of several biases that can lead to bad science.

Blockchain technology is essentially a secure, distributed ledger that can serve as the foundation for many systems. It’s strange to think that something

Plan S proposes to take a hammer to how we fund peer review and publication. Submission fees deserve serious consideration.

Compiling the evidence from dozens of studies doesn't always bring clarity.

In academia's great migration, some researchers are at a disadvantage.

The measles outbreak in the United States and Europe keeps spreading despite the availability of a safe and effective vaccine. The cause? Science-denial.

Paul Benneworth and Kate Maxwell explain why we need public funding for science that creates truly public benefits.

We continue our Peer Review Week celebrations with a roundup of articles about bias, diversity, and inclusion in peer review, by Alice Meadows, including eight lessons we can all learn from them.