Open science serves to make the research process more transparent. But we are still waiting to realize the fruits of open-data policies at scientific journals.
Opinion: The Promise and Plight of Open Data
Opinion: The Promise and Plight of Open Data
Open science serves to make the research process more transparent. But we are still waiting to realize the fruits of open-data policies at scientific journals.
Open science serves to make the research process more transparent. But we are still waiting to realize the fruits of open-data policies at scientific journals.
Christie Wilcox, PhD | Nov 30, 2022 | 10+ min read
A tiny pilot study found that so-called chameleon vines mimicked plastic leaves, but experts say poor study design and conflicts of interest undermine the report.
Despite increasingly strict journal policies requiring the release of computational code files along with research papers, many scientists remain reluctant to share—underscoring the need for better solutions.
The academic networking service ResearchGate was infringing on copyrights held by scientific publishers when it hosted manuscripts from their journals, the European court said, but the website will not have to pay damages.
Preprints can be valuable additions to the scientific literature. But we must start seeing them as perishable commodities rather than akin to peer-reviewed, published studies.
An analysis finds that reviewers are more likely to choose to be de-anonymized when their reviews are positive, suggesting instituting a fully open process might discourage negative feedback.
Alejandra Manjarrez, PhD | Aug 3, 2021 | 7 min read
The plan’s signatories seek to make the results of their funded research available to all, but some scientists say the transition to open access has led to climbing publication fees and could exacerbate global disparities.
Collecting data on the various races, sexual orientations, and gender identities of editors at 25 scientific and medical journals, researchers document the underrepresentation of minority groups.
Zhangfeng Hu will be unable to submit manuscripts for three years after having violated the journal’s policy about making study materials available to other scientists.
The editor-in-chief will step down this month following the release of a podcast in February that suggested systemic racism does not exist in medicine.
Malcolm Macleod, who helped develop these best practices, tells The Scientist how the new guidelines for manuscript publishing seek to support a push for transparent and thorough sharing of methods and data.