Category: Peer review

How come “publish or perish” didn’t touch Fred Sanger?

Like Peter Higgs, two-time Nobelist Sanger would not survive today’s world of science. more

Peer review: Researcher admits to enhanced images

As a rule, claims that don’t hold up feature a background of intense desire or unshaken existing beliefs more

Can’t risk new directions AFTER tenure either, says prof

Prof: too many grant proposals are written for research that is already well underway with pretty much guaranteed outcomes. more

Freeman Dyson: Proud of not having a PhD

Dyson: … it has become now a kind of union card more

Should peer reviewers sign their names?

Prof: I find that I write better reviews when I’m not anonymous. more

Open Access founder abandons free science; just go back to “name” journals, he says

The wonderful thing about science is the way it promotes somnolent faith that the System is somehow churning out … what is that stuff it’s churning out just now anyway? Oops, that’d be $64 to find out so … more

Top US official investigating research misconduct quits in frustration

Couldn’t get anything done due to bureaucracy. These are the people who police transparency, see? more

Entomologist surprised his name is included in a retracted anti-Darwin paper

We here are surprised that anyone would wish their name to appear on a pro-Darwin paper. Today, that’s like having your name appear on a pro-phlogiston paper. more

Lone maverick in science “a bit of an outdated concept,” says cell biologist

The piece puts one in mind of Tom Bethell’s aren’t-I-good? girls, but that may be an unfair assessment. more

Would the 500 major pre-1970 discoveries be vetoed today?

That’s what a group of scientists, including some Nobelists, told the The Guardian on Tuesday. more

Yes, Victoria, science journals do need an alternative to peer review

Because, as Rob Sheldon put it re Science and Nature, “The brand is taking a major hit, and the bottom line is starting to get affected.” more

Is science today an overrated endeavour?

The surest sign of trouble is that worry about these problems is seen as “anti-science,” despite the steady drumbeat of bad news. That makes reform impossible instead of just difficult. more

Could physics be as bad as social psychology for scandals?

We wouldn’t raise this possibility except that science writer George Johnson did at the New York Times. more

Peer review compared to ranking the quality of artists

Question: Many people have heard Michael Shermer’s self-satisfied pronouncements about the peer review process in 2011. Would he really say the same things today? more

Researchers: Dishonesty can mean greater creativity

One wonders whether great scientists could have shown more creativity by cheating. Well, yes, but … more

How, exactly, to construct a gibberish paper that gets accepted by journals

Here’s a challenge for ID types: There must be a way to tell when a sentence is gibberish and when it is meaningful. more

Another Nobelist denounces peer review

Sydney Brenner: I think it has become a completely corrupt system. more

Rob Sheldon comments, in light of Nobelist Sydney Brenner trashing peer review

One irritated scientist is nothing new. But now there are whole communities that are estranged from the gatekeepers at Science and Nature. more

Computer-generated nonsense research papers story trending

Despite the fact that information not matter underlies the universe, thinking appears just too old-fashioned now. ;) more

This is not a hoax: 120 computer-generated nonsense papers are being removed from science papers database

The sad thing, of course, is the self-righteous folk rushing to defend science as it is, in articles, columns, and letters, at the very time when others are trying to clean it up. They often sound like they have been using the SCIgen hoaxer themselves – but believe it anyway. more

Next Page »