Is Publication Success a Matter of Dumb Luck?
Researchers may publish their best work at any point in their careers, a new study reports. This is not the same as success being the result of random forces or just plain “dumb luck.”
What Researchers Value from Publishers, Canadian Survey
Peer review, journal reputation, and fast publication were selected by Canadian researchers as the top three factors in deciding where to submit their manuscripts, trumping open access, article-level metrics, and mobile access, a recent study reports.
Are Scientists Reading Less? Apparently, Scientists Didn't Read This Paper
When novel, newsworthy results are discovered to be wrong, is that still news?
Trusting Scientists and Science Journalists — A New Poll Suggests the Public is Skeptical
A new poll finds that trust in scientists and science journalists is fairly low. But are the two questions separable when it comes to the general public?
Stick to Your Ribs: Challenging the Access Crisis
Revisiting a post from 2011 that called for evidence for a better understanding of access to the research literature.
Publish-or-Perish Culture Promotes Scientific Narcissism
Publication rewards productive scientists but has the unintended consequences of isolating scholars, reducing knowledge transfer and steering scientists away from engaging in policy and the press.
Challenging the Access Crisis
A review of the literature shows that access conditions are getting better, not worse. So, why do we hear just the opposite?
Openness and Secrecy in Science — A Careful Balance
If openness is an ideological tenant of science, why are scientists so secretive?
The Stick and the Carrot: Why Direct Incentives in Science are Dangerous
Reputation — fragile, cumulative, and indirect — is the reward of science. Direct compensation to motivate specific behaviors is a dangerous proposal.