There are major systemic problems associated with peer review that are negatively affecting scientific credibility.
Everything you need to know about predatory publishers.
The scientific impact of a research paper increases with every additional commenter who provides feedback – particularly if the comment came from a well-connected academic.
The traditional mode of publishing scientific research faces much criticism – primarily for being too slow and sometimes shoddily done. Maybe fewer publications of higher quality is the way forward.
When research and commerce become entangled, consumers are the losers.
There is mounting evidence to show scientists and researchers why public engagement is worth their while.
Peer review is a crucial part of the academic publication system. It is also a critical part of the hiring and evaluation process. What's the problem with peer review?
Some water researchers are ignoring the evidence offered by sampling if it doesn't fit their preconceived notions. But science should always be honest and open.
Researchers at a fertility clinic in Athens appear to have reversed the menopause in a small group of women – but will the science stand up to scrutiny?
The unavoidable regime of publication pervades contemporary academic life across the world. While presented as a virtuous thing, it can actually suffocate the academic profession.
A number of high-profile cases in which academics have fabricated their data points to a much larger problem around scholarly misconduct.
Sometimes big research news bypasses the usual scientific publishing process. Here's why that's not good for scientists or the public.
Peer review is not infallible, but it's central to how science works. In this extract from Peter Doherty's new book, The Knowledge Wars, he explains how it works in practice.
To the mark the eighth annual Open Access Week, we asked our readers what they wanted to know about the initiative. Here are their questions with answers from our experts.
Researchers who feel pressured to publish in high ranking journals are more likely to cut corners, or even commit academic fraud.
Why do predatory and vanity academic publishers and conferences exist? Why are they flourishing now? And what can they tell us about the failings of academia?
A recent hoax study suggesting chocolate helps people lose weight highlights many problems with the way science is conducted and reported by the media.
Sexism still exists in science, but a recent scandal shows that progress is being made.
Sexist peer review case sheds light on the need to tackle gender and racial discrimination in universities.
Putting the power of the crowd to work could raise more money for scientific research.