This study demonstrates that openly shared data can increase the scale of scientific studies conducted by data contributors, and can recruit scientists from a broader range of disciplines.

A systematic review of definitions of “open peer review” or “open review”, to create a corpus of 122 definitions.

How to provide the skills researchers need?

An analysis using the CWTS Leiden Ranking data.

How cryptocurrencies may generate capital for scientific funding via dividend reinvestment.

The future of data science education in a data democratized world.

Free online tools for networking, data sharing and measuring research impact.

No generalizable gold OA citation advantage at journal level.

A unified definition of open peer review – an author and reviewer in conversation

Big Science and cross‐disciplinary collaborations have reshaped the intellectual structure of research areas. A number of works have tried to uncover this hidden intellectual structure.

Enthusiasm for using Twitter as a source of data in the social sciences extends to measuring the impact of research with Twitter data being a key component in the new altmetrics approach.

Cultural differences between industry and academia can create or increase difficulties in reproducing research findings.

The landscape of the cash-per-publication reward policy in China and reveal its trend since the late 1990s.

A forgotten experiment from the 1960s.

New paper illustrates the brutal and sexist comments faced by women in economics, and likely other fields as well.

When comparing journals using citation-based metrics, the percentage of highly cited papers is more informative than the average number of citations.

Self-citations, if left unchecked, can have a negative impact on the scientific workforce, the way that we publish new knowledge, and ultimately the course of scientific advance.

A quantitative analysis of contemporary publishing patterns in the humanities, as well as a conceptual account of the historical relationship of publishing practices to the modern research university.

Established publishers have a strong motivation to hype claims of predation as damaging to the scholarly and scientific endeavour.

Guidelines for active and efficient data sharing between those generating data and those analyzing it.

Measuring the veracity of scientific reports by citation analysis.

Understanding the research dynamics preceding the emergence of new areas.

Scientists are required to communicate science and research not only to other experts in the field, but also to scientists and experts from other fields, as well as to the public and policymakers. One fundamental suggestion when communicating with non-experts is to avoid professional jargon.

Published P-values provide a window into the global enterprise of medical research. The aim of this study was to use the distribution of published P-values to estimate the relative frequencies of null and alternative hypotheses and to seek irregularities suggestive of publication bias.

The infographic shows how to achieve 100% Open Access for free and legally.

We propose to use an approach that yields a simple numerical measure of veracity, the R-factor, by summarizing the outcomes of already published studies that have attempted to test a claim.

Although there are differences among journals across the spectrum of JIFs, the citation distributions overlap extensively, demonstrating that the citation performance of individual papers cannot be inferred from the JIF.

Large study of open research analysed reader data from Unpaywall tool, which finds freely available versions of articles.

A collection of thirteen papers that were intended to be unpublishable. All were submitted to predatory journals to expose non-existent peer review and exploitative practices.