The Scientist

» science publishing

Most Recent

image: Preprints Galore

Preprints Galore

By | November 12, 2013

The research community sees the launch of a new life science–centric preprint server.

0 Comments

image: Opinion: Video Saved the Scientific Publication

Opinion: Video Saved the Scientific Publication

By | November 11, 2013

How visual materials and methods can save scientists time and money.

2 Comments

image: H5N1 Researcher Continues Legal Battle

H5N1 Researcher Continues Legal Battle

By | November 6, 2013

The Dutch scientist who mutated a strain of the avian flu virus to be transmissible between mammals is headed to appeals court to protect his right to publish the work unimpeded.

2 Comments

image: Impact Forecasts Cloudy

Impact Forecasts Cloudy

By | October 31, 2013

Current models do a poor job of predicting the impact individual scientists will have, according to a study.

0 Comments

image: Opinion: Problems with Hidden COI

Opinion: Problems with Hidden COI

By | October 28, 2013

There may be much more to conflicts of interest than what gets declared.

0 Comments

image: Week in Review: October 21–25

Week in Review: October 21–25

By | October 25, 2013

PubMed launches Commons; measuring HIV’s latent reservoir; immune-related pathway variation in genome, microbiome; rapamycin and flu vaccines; grasshopper mice resistant to pain

0 Comments

image: Post-Publication Peer Review Mainstreamed

Post-Publication Peer Review Mainstreamed

By | October 22, 2013

The launch of PubMed Commons highlights the pros and cons of re-reviewing published papers. 

6 Comments

image: Opinion: Academic Waste

Opinion: Academic Waste

By | October 17, 2013

From funding to publishing, academic research needlessly burns through time and money.

3 Comments

image: Opinion: Honorary Authorship Is Antiquated Etiquette

Opinion: Honorary Authorship Is Antiquated Etiquette

By | October 16, 2013

Though the practice may be well-intentioned, naming courtesy authors can hurt science and scientists.

3 Comments

image: Useless Peer Review?

Useless Peer Review?

By | October 15, 2013

A study shows that the methods by which scientists evaluate each other’s work are error-prone and poor at measuring merit.

3 Comments

Popular Now

  1. Broad Wins CRISPR Patent Interference Case
    Daily News Broad Wins CRISPR Patent Interference Case

    The USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board has ruled in favor of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard retaining intellectual property rights covered by its patents for CRISPR gene-editing technology.

  2. Cannibalism: Not That Weird
    Reading Frames Cannibalism: Not That Weird

    Eating members of your own species might turn the stomach of the average human, but some animal species make a habit of dining on their own.

  3. Henrietta Lacks’s Family Seeks Compensation
  4. Can Plants Learn to Associate Stimuli with Reward?
Business Birmingham