Politics and the lack of compensation are among the factors that can undermine the peer review process, which is important to the quality of knowledge in academic journals.
There is a rising number of predatory journals in academia, challenging scholars to determine which publications are legitimate.
Marat Musabitov/Getty Images
In some cases, it can be difficult for academics to know which journals are not credible – but other times, people feel pressure to publish in these publications.
The open-access service PCI has opened the door for researchers to take charge of the review and publishing system, and move toward greater transparency in knowledge production.
Journalists covering scientific research during the COVID-19 pandemic increased their reliance on preprints.
(Shutterstock)
Preprints are often free to use, making them more accessible for journalists to report on. However, as they have yet to undergo peer review, science journalists take a gamble on their accuracy.
Open access journals make peer-reviewed research available to anyone interested.
(Shutterstock)
Some open access journals — those that don’t charge their readers a fee — require that researchers pay to publish with them. Removing author fees helps more researchers to publish their work.
Tough feedback can shake our confidence. But there are healthy, helpful ways to process it. And yes, venting is one of them!
Inflammatory cells surrounding amyloid plaque and activation of astrocytes, critical in maintaining the brain health.
Curtin Health Innovation Research Institute
Not all Alzheimer’s research has been compromised by allegations of scientific fraud. But we should interrogate whether the governing bodies of research and drug approvals are truly effective.
Peer review is an essential part of academic publishing, but it can be exploitative, opaque and slow. There’s plenty journals, publishers and universities can do to make the system work better.
Peer review of research sounds like it should be a conversation between equals. Instead, it can be patronizing, demanding and simply unkind. A group of journal editors thinks this should change.
Preclinical research — the kind that takes place before testing on humans — often guides decisions about which potential treatments should continue to clinical trials. But attempts to replicate 50 studies found the odds of getting the same results were only about 50-50.
(Pexels/Artem Podrez)
Preclinical studies are an important part of biomedical research, often guiding future trials in humans. Failure to replicate research results suggests a need to increase the quality of studies.
Policy-makers lack an understanding of how to assess research and the quality of that research. We need to do better during the COVID-19 pandemic and during future health crises.
(Louis Reed/Unsplash)
In most countries, ignorance about how to use evidence properly to inform decision-making has led to missteps during the COVID-19 pandemic. Here’s how to do better.
Preprints are scientific papers made available before being published in a peer-reviewed journal. The Australian Research Council has banned researchers from citing them in grant applications.
Scientists launch a balloon designed to measure ozone levels.
NOAA/Unsplash
Mainstream academic publishing presents many obstacles to Indigenous authors, especially the conventional peer review process — but there are ways to overcome this.
If what you’re reading seems too good to be true, it just might be.
Mark Hang Fung So/Unsplash
Across our global network we are employing guidelines that we hope will allow readers to understand this approach we take to the reporting and analysis of research.
If expert advice on the pandemic turns out to be wrong, it will have dire consequences for how reliable scientific evidence is treated in other policy areas, such as climate change.