When it comes to protecting the scientific literature from bias, the safeguards that academics now use are sorely inadequate.

Researchers are urged to make their work accessible, but simplifying complex ideas doesn’t support great scholarship.

Research can only exist with good and secure funding, but when obtaining funding becomes a dominant part of investigators’ activity, the system has a problem.

Honoring young researchers who champion rigorous, transparent research is a small step towards changing the culture of science.

Too many senior scholars abuse their power when it comes to assigning credit.

Ask not what you can do for reproducibility; ask what reproducibility can do for you.

We have little or no evidence that peer review 'works,' but we have lots of evidence of its downside.

Drivers of research may need to be tweaked to ensure better contribution to society.

For most young researchers, academic research is the love of their life. But how much can and should be sacrificed for this love?

There are too many PhD students for too few academic jobs - but with imagination, the problem could be solved.

Scientific innovation is being smothered by a culture of conformity.

It is not an insult when others try to replicate our research—it is standard science

Public funding made available for research after the WWII were expected to lead to industrial development, economic growth, and a general improvement of living standards. Yet, this model has been questioned for a few year.

The web had been created to bring academics together; now it offered them a way of sharing their research online for free.

If peer review were a drug, it would never get on the market.

At first glance the patriarchy appears to be thriving. Yet there is plenty of cause for concern. Men cluster at the bottom as well as the top.

Written agreements between parties in research collaborations are not a sign of a lack of faith.

Giving staff and students a say in how institutions are run would strengthen governance and clip the wings of administrators.

New kinds of dogs, goats and monkeys are being made quickly, although scientists voice worries about ethics and whether the methods should be used on humans.

The traditional peer-reviewed publication model is fraying.

Interview with Dr. Michael Lauer on peer review of NIH grant applications and how it can be improved.

Michael Specter on CRISPR, a new technology that enables us to manipulate our genetic code with unprecedented ease, and which may lead to new cancer treatments.

Social media is shaking up how scientists talk about gender issues.

Over the past nine years, Canada has been a pretty dreary place for scientists.

The Eurosceptics say universities would be unaffected, or even improved, by a Brexit. They are wrong, says this vice-chancellor.

The use of journal impacts in evaluating individuals has its inherent dangers. In an ideal world, evaluators would read each article and make personal judgments.

Unique companies invest early and often to develop technology from the ivory tower.

Nosek et al. found that compared to simply asking experts to predict the likelihood that studies will be reproduced, asking them to bet money on the outcomes improved the accuracy of the guesses.

Turning research grants into loans risks stymieing successful industry

The international university ranking scene has become increasingly complex, confusing and controversial.