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 […]
Consciously we might be talking about the impending sustainability crisis, but unconsciously we find ways to actually maintain the status quo.
In a conclusion to his two earlier articles on post-publication peer review, Andy Tattersall argues that while new ways to measure scholarly value may not be perfect yet, it’s still high time to start introducing them more widely.
Behavioral scientists have seized on social media and their massive data sets as a way to quickly and cheaply figure out what people are thinking and doing. But some of those tweets and thumbs ups can be misleading.
It’s not necessarily the type of peer review that makes an academic article scholarly, argues Christoper Sampson, but the transparency of how the conclusions were reached.
Although universities and funding bodies pay lip-service to the importance of multi-discipline research, a physicist and an anthropologist argue there is a long way to go before the reality matches the rhetoric.
Looking specifically at Australia, the author of the book on research integrity wonders how rampant plagiarizing and fabricating may be among researchers.
The author of a book on research ethics for social scientists suggests that issues such as antagonism with university review boards and new complexities introduced by Big Data can make integrity a sometime elusive quality.
A lot has been made about Guy Scott being a white man. But Stephen Chan argues that’s one of the less remarkable aspects of Zambia’s fill-in leader.