Over at the Scholarly Kitchen, Kent Anderson asks whether the scientific community is measuring the wrong things when assessing a researcher's productivity. While scientists are often judged by their "number of publications, number of citations, [and] impact factors of publication outlets," Anderson argues that "perhaps we should measure how many results have been replicated."

Get the full story

This story is free
for registered users

Registering provides access to this and other free content.

Register now.

Already have an account?
Login Now.

In PLOS this week: locus linked to non-syndromic hearing loss, phylogenetic relationships of Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates, and more.

In a column at Nature, researcher Fyodor Kondrashov worries about the influence of politics on Russian science.

The term 'epigenetics' is being used by quacks to give them a veneer of science, writes Adam Rutherford at the Observer.

The NIH has issued a preliminary guidance for newborn dried blood spot research.