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 National Science Foundation, the largest government funder of basic social and behavioral research in the United States, is changing how it “positions” some of its research programs in those fields. While the changes are meant to better highlight the value of social science, not everyone is pleased by the changes.
This Tuesday at 9 a.m., the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine will be hosting a national symposium in response to the 200-page report: Reproducibility and Replicability in Science. The symposium will feature discussions on actions taken or contemplated in response to the report’s findings. Learn more or find out how to watch live.
In the first post from a series of bulletins on public data that social and behavioral scientists might be interested in, Gary Price links to an analysis from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse.
A database of retractions shows hundreds of academic articles with Australian authors have been withdrawn. Research misconduct threatens to corrode trust in academic qualifications and publications.
For most people, the idea of academia and heavy metal coming together under a single roof represents a paradox. It’s a misplaced assumption built on ingrained ideas about these two cultural forms.
The late South African musician Johnny Clegg was also an anthropologist both formally, as a lecturer on ethnography, and informally as he continued a teaching career from the stage.
The U.S. National Science Foundation has followed other research-based government agencies in trying to ring-fence American research from collaborative and acquisitive foreign actors. Could they mean China?
Britain’s Labour Party historically had strong ties to the idea and later the state of Israel. Now a host of factors are challenging the traditional connection to Zionism and even raising concerns of antisemitism.