Could Distributed Peer Review Better Decide Grant Funding?
The landscape of academic grant funding is notoriously competitive and plagued by lengthy, bureaucratic processes, exacerbated by difficulties in finding willing reviewers. Distributed […]
The appointment of climate skeptic Bjorn Lomborg has focused attention on a newish metric for assessing academic importance, the H-Index.
Critics of various bits of research often go to great lengths to make the studies seem silly, not serious. But ‘silly’ endeavors often result in serious societal gains — and maybe a boost for your career.
Science is considered a source of truth and the importance of its role in shaping modern society cannot be overstated. But in […]
The author of ‘In the name of the Rose, Umberto Eco, has another classic under his belt. Now in its 23rd edition in Italy and translated into 17 languages, How to Write a Thesis has just received its long overdue publication in English.
Pleased with its debut team of social and behavioral scientists working to make federal policy better, the White House is seeking more members for its version of a ‘nudge’ unit. The deadline to apply is April 12.
Imagine an ethics review system where the researcher’s proposal is read by an ‘ethics jury’ of four to six researchers drawn, as in legal juries, from the academic population at large, suggests Australia’s Gigi Foster.
Routledge’s Terry Clague sheds reasonable doubt on the assertion that contributing to edited book chapters is”akin to burying your research.”
Journalists have their own set of accuracy issues, so don’t add to them by making it hard to pick out your message from a torrent of disconnected thoughts carpet bombed on the ink-stained class. Here, Kevin Anselmo offers advice on preparation and training beforehand to reduce the likelihood of being misquoted.