Jump to navigation
Enter the article’s url One of our curators will take care of it as soon as possible!
Subscribe to our weekly newsletter.
One prominent research journal just updated its description to explain why it won’t be perfect—and that’s great.
Two years ago this month, news of the replication crisis reached the front page of the New York Times.
Our culture’s understanding of science is very, very broken, and on Saturday, it was impossible to ignore.
The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy has been headless since Donald Trump moved into the White House.
Scientists need to learn how to communicate science strategically.
The academic paper has some inherent limitations—chief among them, that it can provide only a summary of a given research project.
The synthetic biology community is divided.
Satirical academic social media accounts go serious to protest Donald Trump.
How the scientist who founded the science of mistakes ended up mistaken.
Nonscientists should take part in discussions about research priorities and more.
It’s not for oil or guns. It’s for plagiarized dissertations. And every self-respecting doctor, lawyer, and politician in the country wants one.
The current incentives structure — mostly based on publishing in prestigious journals — discourages sharing, replication, and, some argue, careful science.
Science magazine just published a great piece on the utility of Sci-Hub. Unfortunately, its defense of its own business model is flawed.
There’s a replication crisis in biomedicine—and no one even knows how deep it runs.
And how to fix them. By Ivan Oransky and Adam Marcus.
Content piracy may be illegal, but price gouging is at least as despicable.
An influential psychological theory, borne out in hundreds of experiments, may have just been debunked. How can so many scientists have been so wrong?
The overall demand for new Ph.D.s in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and math is stagnant.