Finding and reporting an irregularity in a published study can lead people down an unexpected path.

Collecting data on the various races, sexual orientations, and gender identities of editors at 25 scientific and medical journals, researchers document the underrepresentation of minority groups.

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.

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.

Take a break from the bench to puzzle and peruse.

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.

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.

Then there are the counterfeiters.

Meet some of the people featured in the December 2020 issue of The Scientist.

Responses collected from around 25,000 academics reveal that 20 percent couldn’t do their work at all in the spring, but most had found ways to keep their research going.

While some academics have called for compensation for assessing other scientists’ work, publishers haven’t warmed to the idea.

Predatory journals are especially dangerous during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The changes, which affect the declarations authors have to sign and the peer-review process, have received a mixed response from the scientific community.

Despite high-profile political tensions between the two countries, researchers in the US and China are working together now more than ever, according to our bibliometric study.

When submitting manuscripts to Western journals, authors face issues that go beyond language barriers.

Constructively critiquing the scientific literature should be an essential part of the postdoctoral experience, and early career researchers have shown that they are up to the task.

Half of early-career researchers say they’d participated in the peer review process with their mentors without getting credit.

As we await the announcement of the 2019 Nobel Prize winners, it’s time to question why female scientists still lag behind their male colleagues.