The latest academic stunt to receive widespread coverage raises interesting points about vanity journals and peer review, but we must also question the motives of the authors.
According to United States law, studies of potential medicines and diagnostics are supposed to make their results publicly available within 12 months. But up to half of studies don’t follow the rules—and no one has ever faced penalties.
Online discussions and post-publication analyses are catching mistakes that sneak past editorial review.
According to one study, which was presumably read by more than three people, half of all academic papers are read by no more than three people.
So-called "open access" academic publishing saves money and has political backing. But is it a good idea?
The mythbusters of academe take on soft science from the United States, and find a propensity toward aggrandizement.
The use of journal rankings to rate individual papers, scientists, and even programs has upset loads of people in academia. One paper's solution: Get rid of journals.
A lot of science's ills have been traced to the way it gets published. What if researchers laid out their dirty laundry before even donning a lab coat?
A look at the Journal of Visualized Experiments, the first journal devoted to publishing scientific research in a video format.
