A survey of journals and editors in five areas of research - ecology, economics, medicine, physics and psychology - reveals a range of differences in their approach to peer review.
Almost a quarter of faculty evaluation documents from US and Canadian universities mention Journal Impact Factor and often imply that it measures research quality.
The availability of almost all articles from toll access journals in the Sci-Hub repository will disrupt scholarly publishing towards more open models.
In studies of gender disparities in academia, increased focus is required on within-group variability and between-group overlap of distributions when interpreting and reporting results.
Early career researchers commonly peer review manuscripts on behalf of invited reviewers, often without receiving feedback or being named to the journal.
An analysis of more than 70,000 journal articles, including 5405 that were first released as a preprint on bioRxiv, shows that articles with a preprint received 49% more attention and 36% more citations than articles without one.
An analysis of 67,885 preprints on bioRxiv finds evidence for disparities in international participation that are similar to the disparities found in conventional journals.