The culture of scientific research desperately needs a makeover. Enter the eLife Ambassador program.
After nearly 10 years, some issues have definitely moved on, but so many are still stuck in really dark and nasty places.
Public perception of which cancers get research funding differs greatly from what actually gets funded. Here’s why.
It is sad that highly-qualified, highly-educated scientific researchers need to worry about pleading their case to have a national pension contribution.
How about offering permanent lecturers the ability to undertake research in a leading lab in the same department?
David Kent looks at whether it is ethical (and legal) for an academic to share a paper they are reviewing with their lab group.
I can happily report that something has indeed changed at NSERC and the number of postdoctoral fellowships being awarded is definitely recovering.
David Kent looks at some of the new ways scientific journals are trying to fix the current peer review system.
As with scientific research in the time of “big data”, the critical thing for a researcher to identify is what sorts of questions the data might answer.
Clearly, our readers respond to posts on “career resources”, based on our own experiences.
David Kent takes a closer look at some of the journal’s peer reviewers – and the results are distressing.
