Peer review varies in quality and thoroughness. Making it publicly available could improve it.

The venue for post-publication peer review was not getting enough participation.

From efforts to increase the transparency of the review process to initiatives offering training, there are many attempts underway to make better reviewers out of researchers.

Two manuscripts published without methods point to the importance of community policing on preprint archives.

The Chinese government finds almost 500 researchers guilty of misconduct in relation to a recent spate of retractions from a cancer journal.

New features include increased security of user anonymity.

We suggest a centralized facility for submitting to journals—one that would benefit scientists and not only publishers.

In laboratory experiments that simulated oceanic conditions, the fish responded to magnetic fields, a sensory input that may aid migration.

An analysis of journals from the American Geophysical Union finds women are underrepresented as reviewers, likely because editors recommend them less often.