The public loses when their only choices are inaccessible, impenetrable journal articles or overhyped click-bait about science. Scientists themselves need to step up and help bridge the divide.
Elizabeth Bass, Stony Brook University (The State University of New York)
Nobel Prize-winning science is almost by definition arcane and complex. While these esoteric fields have their moment in the spotlight, does it matter if the rest of us understand?
It’s a problem when much of what winds up in scientific journals isn’t replicable, for various reasons. The research community is taking baby steps toward addressing the “reproducibility crisis.”
Science has a reputation for vigorous hypothesis-testing in the search for truth. But when errors make it into scientific journals, the hallowed self-correction process seldom lives up to the ideal.
The 3rd annual John Maddox Prize has been awarded to Emily Willingham, a science writer in the US, and David Robert Grimes, a physicist at the University of Oxford, in recognition of their work in the…
Another story about how some food holds the cure for cancer is making headlines in the Daily Express. This time the saviour is the humble carrot. But it isn’t its first time in the limelight. In March…
Martin Luther King said, “On some positions, Cowardice asks the question, ‘Is it safe?’ Expediency asks the question, ‘Is it politic?’ And Vanity comes along and asks the question, ‘Is it popular?’ But…