This week’s Nobel winners will have drawn on teams, often multinational.

In 1991, an electronic system through which interested parties could access non-peer-reviewed physics papers was launched by Paul Ginsparg at Los Alamos National Laboratory.

Bad research just doesn’t affect the people in the area around it, the people who might spend years trying to take a dodgy result and extend it.

Once again, the term "open" requires further thought to probe the pros and cons. With open source, we may be once again doing things that make the big bigger and the small less relevant.

How and why we should get rid of author lists in scientific publications.

Designed to identify individuals who might be gaming their h-index score, the s-index may do more harm than good.

Research institutions should explicitly seek job candidates who can be frankly self-critical of their work, says Jeffrey Flier.

Scientists have few direct incentives to replicate other researchers’ work, including precious little funding to do replications. Can that change?

An introspective look at peer review, one we hope will be useful for future discussions on the topic.

The White House and its lackeys in certain federal agencies are censoring scientific inquiry that could inform the public and government policy.

PubMed is found to contain predatory journals and publishers, likely reflecting a long-term and broader problem, which only adds to the confusion about what exactly PubMed represents at this point.

With a national election this month, Germany proves that foresight and stability can power research.

Researchers seeking science funding can be big losers in the equality and diversity game.

Britain must seek to protect research funding for its universities when it leaves the European Union or risk losing its leading role in innovation.

Three rules for ensuring that A.I. systems don't run roughshod over humans.

What you should look for in an academic friend.

Wise and honourable assessors of grant applications must be allowed to use their discretion, says Sui Huang

Lab heads should let junior researchers take their projects with them when they start their own labs — it drives innovation and discovery, argues Ben A.

The ballooning costs of attending high-end academic conferences are excluding early-career researchers. But we need their fresh perspectives

When you think of innovation, you also may think of patents and profits. But two Swiss researchers argue that we should be focusing more on people and places.

The idea that American workers are being left in the dust because they lack technological savvy does not stand up to scrutiny. Our focus should be on coordination and communication between workers and employers.

For the record, I do peer reviews! For free!

Reviewing is an implicit part of vaguely-defined jobs.

The recent attempt by China to censor scholarship points to a growing set of challenges in information dissemination. Blaming the publisher obscures these issues.

Rather than repealing or replacing the impact factor, its producers should rename it to reflect its intended function more accurately.

Consortium hopes to make all German-authored papers free to read by paying annual fee.

A lack of recognition for the value of failure holds back creative risk-taking in science.

The meaningless tasks and faux-business strategies prioritised by British universities have skewed their real role, writes André Spicer

Although the popular blacklist of predatory publishers is gone, the suspect journals they produce are not.