Subscribe to the
weekly newsletter

Meet the 'Data Thugs' out to Expose Shoddy and Questionable Research

15.02.2018

Researchers Debate Whether Journals Should Publish Signed Peer Reviews

14.02.2018

Hypothesis and the Center for Open Science Collaborate on Annotation

09.02.2018

Peer Review Survey Results

08.02.2018

Six Essential Reads on Peer Review

08.02.2018

Early Career Researchers and Their Involvement in Peer Review

08.02.2018

Network Effects on Editorial Decisions in Four Computer Science Journals

24.01.2018

Three Decades of Peer Review Congresses

24.01.2018

Survey with Early-Career Researchers

18.01.2018

The Peer Review Process for Awarding Funds to International Science Research Consortia: a Qualitative Developmental Evaluation

17.01.2018

Journal Peer Review: A Bar or Bridge? An Analysis of a Paper's Revision History and Turnaround Time, and the Effect on Citation

09.01.2018

Attitudes and Experience Amongst Editors, Authors and Reviewers

14.12.2017

New Feature Aims to Draw Journals Into Post-Publication Comments on PubPeer

11.12.2017

An Ineffective and Unworthy Institution

Should Scientists Receive Credit for Peer Review?

06.12.2017

Make Reviews Public, Says Peer Review Expert

29.11.2017

What Do We Know About Grant Peer Review in the Health Sciences?

29.11.2017

The Future of Research Assessment

27.11.2017

Reviewer Bias in Single- Versus Double-Blind Peer Review

15.11.2017

A Multi-Disciplinary Perspective on Emergent and Future Innovations in Peer Review

02.11.2017
Subscribe to News