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.
The easiest way to undermine good science is to demand that it be made "sound."
Leonard Freedman, president of the Global Biological Standards Institute, discusses the causes of irreproducible science and his latest effort to spread best practices.
A Nobel Laureate has retracted a 2016 paper in Nature Chemistry that explored the origins of life on earth, after discovering the main conclusions were not correct.
A researcher specializing in post-traumatic stress disorder is facing jail time for allegedly embezzling tens of thousands of dollars of federal grant money.
Creating a culture of replication takes prizes, grants and magnanimity — as well as publications.
A new analysis says economics has problems with bias, reproducibility, and statistical power. You know, like all the other social sciences.
Science could benefit from more reporting of null findings, even if the reports were briefer and had less detail than would be needed for peer review.
Dealing with error and bias in academic research.
It sounds almost absurd, but that could be one factor behind the so-called “reproducibility crisis”.
Far from being duped, researchers with few resources are turning to "predatory" journals to publish articles and polish resumes.
Psychologists are pessimistic about the state of their field but want to improve, a survey shows. But are new measures working?
A "completely confusing statement" in a gazette notification has scientists wondering which of their papers will and won't be considered towards their promotions in the future.
The philosophy behind the Registered Report format is that the intrinsic value of science is in the rigor of the method, not the appeal of the results.
When a scientific paper is retracted, it can produce long-term aftershocks.
The Royal Society's statement on research integrity sets out key principles and behaviours of an ethical nature for the Fellowship and all those that receive grants from the Society.
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.
This study investigated the status quo of article retractions by Chinese researchers.
An analysis of potential predatory journals as well as potential poor scientific standards journals.
More than 26 percent of papers identified as systematic reviews or meta-analyses contained spin. This figure rose to up to 84 percent in papers reporting on nonrandomised trials.
Do lay people and scientists themselves recognize that scientists are human and therefore prone to human fallibilities such as error, bias, and even dishonesty?