publication

What happens on the other side of the paper publication submission portal? Christopher Rodrigues, who serves as a journal associate editor, revealed the process.

Seventeen studies coauthored by Gregg Semenza have been retracted, corrected, or raised for concern, and 15 more are currently under investigation.

In this webinar, Fabrício Pamplona discusses the importance of graphics and visual presentation in communicating scientific messages.

The Scientist interviewed clinical pharmacologist Clara Locher, coauthor of a new survey aimed at detecting editorial bias, regarding her team’s findings about biomedical publishing.

Investigators from underrepresented groups have borne the brunt of the disruption to science from the pandemic, according to an opinion piece that outlines ways in which institutions can lessen the damage.

A review article containing contested claims about the tropical medicine drug as a COVID-19 treatment was listed as “provisionally accepted” on the journal’s website before being removed this week.

A study makes policy recommendations to optimize citations, but critics say it fails to acknowledge that citations are a biased and narrow measure of scientific success.

Most of the authors have had papers pulled in the past.

Thousands of open access papers have mistakenly asked readers to pay access fees, but publishers are correcting the errors. 

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

A platform called Kudos helps users disseminate—and explain—their publications for free.

A team of editors and researchers calls on journal publishers to use citation distributions as measures of publication quality rather than relying on much-derided impact factors.

Scanning the literature, scientists find that nearly 2 percent of papers contain duplicated and manipulated figures, among other image-prep no-nos.

Peer reviewers’ assessments of funding proposals to the National Institutes of Health don’t correlate well with later publication citations, a study shows.

Semantic Scholar uses machine reading and vision to extract meaning and impact from academic papers.

A literature scan finds a fraction of researchers who pump out dozens of publications each year.

Two coauthors on the now-retracted stimulus-triggered acquisition of pluripotency studies present yet another revision to the published method.

Molecular biologist Shigeaki Kato has two more retractions, adding to his fraught publication history. 

Study finds that male full professors are more likely than high-ranking female academics to collaborate with more junior colleagues of the same sex.