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 term ‘settler colonialism’ was coined by an Australian historian in the 1960s to describe the occupation of a territory with a […]
As book bans and academic censorship escalate across the United States, this free hour-long webinar gathers experts to discuss the impact these […]
The creation of the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA) has led to a heated debate on the balance between peer review and evaluative metrics in research assessment regimes. Luciana Balboa, Elizabeth Gadd, Eva Mendez, Janne Pölönen, Karen Stroobants, Erzsebet Toth Cithra and the CoARA Steering Board address these arguments and state CoARA’s commitment to finding ways in which peer review and bibliometrics can be used together responsibly.
The large language models, or LLMs, that underlie generative AI tools such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT, have an ethical challenge in how they parasitize freely available data.
Charlie Smith reflects on his interest in psychedelic research, the topic of his research article, “Psychedelics, Psychedelic-Assisted Therapy and Employees’ Wellbeing,” published in Journal of Management Inquiry.
Organizations shouldn’t back away from workplace DEI efforts. Rather, the research suggests, they should double down, using a more inclusive approach that emphasizes civility and dialogue – one aimed at finding common ground.
Paul Allin sets out why the UK’s Royal Statistical Society is launching a new campaign for public statistics.
Why is contestation a better starting point for studying and researching development than ‘everyone wants the same thing’?