Social, Behavioral Scientists Eligible to Apply for NSF S-STEM Grants
Solicitations are now being sought for the National Science Foundation’s Scholarships in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics program, and in an unheralded […]
A study of the 100 top journals in education research found that there’s still almost no effort made to replicate the findings they publish.
How can the public learn the role of algorithms in their daily lives, evaluating the law and ethicality of systems like the Facebook News Feed, search engines, or airline booking systems? Earlier this month Harvard University’s Berkman Center for Internet and Society hosted a conversation about the idea of social science audits of algorithms, and J. Nathan Matias reports on the discourse.
Sarah Necker describes her landmark study on economists’ research norms and practices and finds that while we all agree that fabrication, falsification and plagiarism are bad, a few academics admit they have accepted or offered gifts, money, or sex in exchange for co-authorship, data or promotion.
What does the Facebook emotional contagion study really tells us about research ethics? Perhaps, argues Robert Dingwall, that its time to deregulate public social science.
Could the increasing number of retractions in quality journals be a sign that its time to embrace post-publication open evaluation as a corrective to pre-publication peer review?
Facebook’s unannounced study using its users’ newsfeeds offers a case study in research ethics: where did it lie of the spectrum from ‘ho harm, no foul’ or to an unacceptable violation of participants’ rights? Ethicist David Hunter examines.
The possible retraction of a high profile paper in the medical sciences offers a teachable moment about replication, peer review, cognitive bias and the beauty and beastliness that can be science.
No one expected Tamiflu to be a wonder drug, but indications are that it’s moderately useful in fighting a serious public health threat. But that message was lost last week in an ill-starred rush to beat up on ‘wicked’ Big Pharma, argues Robert Dingwall.