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 […]
Retractions are generally framed as a negative: as science not working properly, as an embarrassment for the institutions involved, or as a flaw in the peer review process. They can be all those things. But they can also be part of a story of science working the right way: finding and correcting errors, and publicly acknowledging when information turns out to be incorrect.
Tejendra Pherali, a professor of education, conflict and peace at University College London, researches the intersection of education and conflict around the world.
In this article, Shelly Ashtar reflects on her longstanding interest in service-related work and how it connects to her research interest in customer satisfaction. Ashtar explores this topic with collaborators Galit B. Yom-Tov, Anat Rafaeli and Jochen Wirtz in “Affect-as-Information: Customer and Employee Affective Displays as Expeditious Predictors of Customer Satisfaction,” in the Journal of Service Research.
The U.S. National Science Foundation’s new Responsible Design, Development, and Deployment of Technologies (ReDDDoT) program supports research, implementation, and educational projects for multidisciplinary, multi-sector teams
The historic Hippocrates has become an iconic figure in the creation myths of medicine. What can the body of thought attributed to him tell us about modern responses to COVID?
Gabriel Miller, currently the president and chief executive officer of the Canadian Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences, has been named the president and chief executive officer of Universities Canada effective March 18.
Overall, it is best to use pie charts sparingly, especially when there is a more “digestible” alternative – the bar chart.
Commenting on the trend for the politically motivated forensic scrutiny of the research records of academics, Till Bruckner argues that singling out individuals in this way has a chilling effect on academic freedom and distracts from efforts to address more important systemic issues in research integrity.