Time to rethink retractions and corrections?

Study finds male Ph.D. candidates submit and publish papers at significantly higher rates than their female peers, even within the same institution. The majors drivers of that gap remain unclear, but one factor is that women teach more during their Ph.D. programs and men serve more often as research assistants.

How does open access affect the usage of scholarly books? A white paper by Springer Nature.

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.

Considerations of open access models that can work across disciplines. The case of ELife, PLoS, and BioOne.

Emerging models of peer review from a range of disciplines and venues, and to ask how they might address some of the issues with our current systems of peer review.

Approximately half of the editors of 52 prestigious U.S. medical journals received payments from the pharmaceutical and medical device industry in 2014.

A survey of researchers at the Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital provides insights into the challenges and opportunities involved in adopting an open science policy across an entire patient-oriented academic institution.

Study suggests women with male partners face bias in searches for junior faculty members.

Psychologists are pessimistic about the state of their field but want to improve, a survey shows. But are new measures working?

Despite many problems with doctoral programmes, PhD students are as committed as ever to pursuing research careers.

Open-access publishing held to the same standards as paid subscription journals.

Investigating the implementation of data management and sharing requirements within seven development research projects.

This Perspective article argues that universities should take action to support open scholarship that benefits society and to return to their core missions of knowledge dissemination, community engagement, and public good.

Figshare's annual report shows that open data has become more embedded in the research community: 82% of survey respondents are aware of open data sets and more researchers are curating their data for sharing.

The current state of research software, a number of the challenges around it that exist in academia, and some potential solutions.

New study in PNAS pushes back on decades of studies suggesting that scientific productivity peaks early and declines thereafter.

Artificial-intelligence program AlphaGo Zero trained in just days, without any human input.

Accounting for audience gender ratio, men asked 1.8 questions for each question asked by a woman.

80% of faculty exhibit a rich diversity of productivity patterns.

An open document that tries to provide a concise analysis of where the global Open Science movement currently stands.

In theoretical computer science and machine learning, over 60% of published papers are on arXiv.

Increased provision of information in accessible repositories appears to be a cost-effective way to advance science. Evidence from a Randomized Control Trial.

Journal editors are more likely to reject papers when they experience trouble recruiting reviewers, reports a new study.

3 case studies that highlight the challenges surrounding decisions about how––and how best––to make things open.

New simulation study says peer review is better at assuring quality research than random publication choices, but some systems of review are significantly better than others. Editors seen as more effective than peer-review panels alone.

An article considering both the efficacy and ethics of piracy, placing ‘guerrilla open access’ within a longer history of piracy and access to knowledge.

This first-of-a-kind report from Knowledge Exchange maps the landscape for Open Access books in the Knowledge Exchange countries; Finland, Netherlands, UK, France, Denmark and Germany, together with Norway and Austria.

Evolutionary differences blamed for squeezing out female researchers.

Increasing portability, scaling, reproducibility, and convenience of R users and developers.