A new analysis suggests that only 14 percent of published biomedical results are wrong, despite prominent opinions to the contrary.
The Scientist
Most Recent
A new online tool allows researchers to compare open-access journal publication fees with article influence, and reveals that you don’t necessarily get what you pay for.
A new initiative in the mathematics research community is gearing up to do the work traditionally organized by a publisher.
Authors retract a decade-old, highly-cited cancer study, admitting sloppy mistakes in the data analysis.
Non-confirmatory or “negative” results are not worthless.
A publisher bills authors $650 to retract a twice-published paper.
The science images and videos that captured our attention in 2012
Fake peer reviews were submitted to Elsevier due to a glitch in the publisher's security system, resulting in the retraction of 11 papers.
The National Institutes of Health will get tough on grantees who fail to comply with its open-access funding rule.
Contrary to previous studies, a new publication finds that most retractions from scholarly literature are not due to misconduct.
Follow The Scientist
Advertisement
Stay Connected with The Scientist
-
The Scientist Magazine
-
The Scientist Careers
-
Neuroscience Research Techniques
-
Genetic Research Techniques
-
Cell Culture Techniques
-
Microbiology and Immunology
-
Cancer Research and Technology
Current Issue
