Zhangfeng Hu will be unable to submit manuscripts for three years after having violated the journal’s policy about making study materials available to other scientists.

The editor-in-chief will step down this month following the release of a podcast in February that suggested systemic racism does not exist in medicine.

Malcolm Macleod, who helped develop these best practices, tells The Scientist how the new guidelines for manuscript publishing seek to support a push for transparent and thorough sharing of methods and data.

Avoiding inbreeding appears to be the exception rather than the norm for animals, according to a new meta-analysis of experimental studies.

The issue’s guest editors resign after falling out with the publisher over the management of papers, including a rejected manuscript on ivermectin, that were submitted for a special issue on drug repurposing for COVID-19.

Perspectives on the basics and future of QA/QC

At a time of fast-paced science and rampant misinformation, can we trust the non–peer-reviewed literature?

The move follows widespread criticism of the episode and its promotion, and the resignation of the podcast’s host.

ASAPbio has developed resources for preprint servers, institutions, scientists, and journalists to promote the responsible reporting of research in the media.

The agreement comes two years after the university system cut ties with the publisher after failing to come to an agreement.

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 response to Ada Hagan’s opinion piece suggesting that our study “compromises response to gender bias.”

A recent analysis that claimed no evidence of gender-based peer review outcomes fails to account for several factors.

The journal Ethology is the first to adopt the guidelines, aimed at clarifying experimental design and the potential biases within.

Few peer-reviewed clinical papers on the pandemic contained original data, and many of those that did had poor experimental design.

An analysis of data from nearly 150 journals across scientific disciplines finds that, if anything, manuscripts authored by women are treated more favorably than those submitted by men.

Scientists from countries with fewer resources are pushing collaborators from higher-income countries to shed biases and behaviors that perpetuate social stratification in the research community.

The Retraction Watch team takes a look at the most important publishing mistakes this year.

Then there are the counterfeiters.