Send us a link
Progress update from symposium sponsors: The Academy of Medical Sciences, the BBSRC, the MRC and Wellcome Trust.
These days, a scientist has to publish a steady stream of research articles to be “successful.” But two new studies argue that that kind of pressure promotes sloppy science at the expense of careful work.
A Cross-Sectional Study
A torrent of low-quality meta-analyses and systematic reviews in biomedicine might be hiding valuable research and misleading scientists.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has been arm-twisting journalists into relinquishing their reportorial independence, our investigation reveals. Other institutions are following suit.
Don't believe every science study you read, because sometimes not even their authors believe them. Here are the issues corrupting good, honest science – and how to fix them.
A dataset that is the result of content mining 167,318 published psychology articles for statistical test results.
The new director of the federal office that guards against misconduct in U.S.-funded biomedical research is aiming to shake things up—but is also encountering rough waters. Kathryn Partin, who took the helm of the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) in December 2015, has launched a top-to-bottom review of the office, which has been criticized for moving too slowly and meting out sanctions that lack teeth.
On The Natural Selection of Bad Science.
Ivan Oransky and Adam Marcus praise the growing scrutiny of scientific publications.
Advancements in the research integrity project launched in 2011.
Can scientists who commit research fraud be rehabilitated? One program is trying to keep ex-fraudsters from falling off the wagon.
Dutch push to tackle fraud and ‘reproducibility crisis’ follows high-profile misconduct cases in the country
A list of 10 rules with researchers in mind: researchers having some knowledge of statistics, possibly with one or more statisticians available in their building, or possibly with a healthy do-it-yourself attitude and a handful of statistical packages on their laptops.
Science has never been more powerful, but it is under attack.
The persistence of poor methods results partly from incentives that favor them, leading to the natural selection of bad science. This dynamic requires no conscious strategizing - no deliberate cheating nor loafing - by scientists, only that publication is a principle factor for career advancement.
The reality of academia is stifling the passion and creativity needed both to enjoy science, and to do it well.
Three of my projects appeared last week on a senator's list of questionable research. Allow me to explain...
John Oliver discusses how and why media outlets so often report untrue or incomplete information as science.
A discussion of the common underpinning problems with the scientific and data analytic practices and point to tools and behaviors that can be implemented to reduce the problems with published scientific results.
After a series of scandals in Nordic science, Denmark and Sweden are rethinking how they investigate allegations of academic fraud and misconduct.
An Australian neuroscientist just pleaded guilty to fraud but received a suspended sentence for his research misconduct.
