Alexandria Library

A curated collection of awesome articles

Here are some ressources related to Replication, Scientific misconduct, Peer review. Hoping you will find learning material, alternative tools or just some interesting stuff.

Home > Science, Technology, Health, Explor... > Neuroscience, Health, Cognition, Me... > Psychology, Behavior, Neuroscience,... > Replication, Scientific misconduct,...

Articles

How Big Oil is manipulating the way you think about climate change
See discussion (59 comments, 81 points) - Archive
Fake scientific papers are alarmingly common
See discussion (99 comments, 191 points) - Archive
Science is a strong-link problem
See discussion (55 comments, 163 points) - Archive
Chemist Rafael Luque suspended without pay for thirteen years
See discussion (117 comments, 100 points) - Archive
Double-anonymous peer review reduces reviewer bias, finds three-year trial
See discussion (30 comments, 92 points) - Archive
Researchers cannot always differentiate AI-generated and original abstracts
See discussion (113 comments, 145 points) - Archive
The rise and fall of peer review
See discussion (104 comments, 199 points) - Archive
Rebuilding after the replication crisis
See discussion (73 comments, 125 points) - Archive
Another scientific body has debunked bitemark analysis
See discussion (236 comments, 406 points) - Archive
Is Peer Review a Good Idea? (2020)
See discussion (92 comments, 92 points) - Archive
Science is political, and that's a bad thing
See discussion (200 comments, 106 points) - Archive
“Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”
See discussion (812 comments, 357 points) - Archive
Breaking the silence around academic bullying
See discussion (98 comments, 111 points) - Archive
Negative incentives in academic research
See discussion (79 comments, 188 points) - Archive
Why video calls are bad for brainstorming
See discussion (100 comments, 180 points) - Archive
Do the same mechanisms that create complex life also create complex technology?
See discussion (61 comments, 96 points) - Archive
Some of the forces blocking new ideas in science
See discussion (64 comments, 170 points) - Archive
What happens when the public lose confidence in academic findings?
See discussion (251 comments, 124 points) - Archive
Crime scene investigators learn to dowse for the dead
See discussion (152 comments, 96 points) - Archive
Nominative determinism in hospital medicine (2015)
See discussion (63 comments, 112 points) - Archive
Slowed canonical progress in large fields of science
See discussion (72 comments, 178 points) - Archive
Trusting science leaves people vulnerable to believing pseudoscience
See discussion (162 comments, 147 points) - Archive
Beware survivorship bias in advice on science careers
See discussion (181 comments, 197 points) - Archive
Researcher experiences of funder suppression of health trial findings
See discussion (28 comments, 128 points) - Archive
Some biologists and ecologists think social media is a risk to humanity
See discussion (189 comments, 268 points) - Archive
A new replication crisis: Research that is less likely to be true is cited more
See discussion (319 comments, 602 points) - Archive
Trust: The Need for Public Understanding of How Science Works
See discussion (236 comments, 200 points) - Archive
Obedience to Authority: The Experiments by Stanley Milgram
See discussion (53 comments, 83 points) - Archive
I tried to report scientific misconduct. How did it go?
See discussion (352 comments, 895 points) - Archive
Millions of animals missing from scientific studies
See discussion (61 comments, 129 points) - Archive
Jeffrey Epstein’s Harvard connections show how money can distort research
See discussion (198 comments, 225 points) - Archive
The Sci-Hub Effect: Sci-Hub downloads lead to more article citations
See discussion (92 comments, 754 points) - Archive
People Drawn to Conspiracy Theories Share a Cluster of Psychological Features
See discussion (180 comments, 86 points) - Archive
To do better science, admit that you’re not objective
See discussion (78 comments, 111 points) - Archive
Nature will publish peer review reports as a trial
See discussion (105 comments, 239 points) - Archive
Humans are hardwired to dismiss facts that don’t fit their worldview
See discussion (125 comments, 145 points) - Archive
Survey of scientists sheds light on reproducibility crisis (2016)
See discussion (173 comments, 262 points) - Archive
This year’s Nobel prizes prompt soul-searching among economists
See discussion (129 comments, 156 points) - Archive
Nature’s survey of 6k grad students reveals the turbulence of doctoral research
See discussion (63 comments, 117 points) - Archive
Association between gifts from pharma group to drug prescribed by French doctors
See discussion (58 comments, 133 points) - Archive
Early-career setback and future career impact
See discussion (26 comments, 133 points) - Archive
We shouldn’t take peer review as the ‘gold standard’
See discussion (146 comments, 224 points) - Archive
Scientific Bias in Favor of Studies Finding Gender Bias
See discussion (52 comments, 99 points) - Archive
We tried to publish a replication of a Science paper in Science
See discussion (156 comments, 290 points) - Archive
Plagiarism detectors are a crutch, and a problem
See discussion (108 comments, 89 points) - Archive
John Ioannidis Aims His Bazooka at Nutrition Science (2018)
See discussion (81 comments, 103 points) - Archive
American justice system ignores science in the pursuit of convictions
See discussion (75 comments, 179 points) - Archive
Strongest opponents of GM foods know the least but think they know the most
See discussion (96 comments, 89 points) - Archive
Psychology’s Replication Crisis Is Real
See discussion (276 comments, 490 points) - Archive
Mathematical Simplicity May Drive Evolution's Speed
See discussion (32 comments, 90 points) - Archive
Mathematics Shows How to Ensure Evolution
See discussion (19 comments, 85 points) - Archive
Sexual harassment is rife in the sciences, finds landmark US study
See discussion (237 comments, 130 points) - Archive
How DNA Transfer Framed Lukis Anderson for Murder
See discussion (10 comments, 98 points) - Archive
Newspaper op-eds change minds
See discussion (38 comments, 113 points) - Archive
Understanding Bias in Peer Review
See discussion (18 comments, 97 points) - Archive
A 2017 Nobel laureate says he left science because he ran out of money
See discussion (80 comments, 226 points) - Archive
Vermont Medical School Says Goodbye to Lectures
See discussion (66 comments, 109 points) - Archive
The incentives of academia naturally select for less reliable results (2016)
See discussion (51 comments, 106 points) - Archive
The Google Memo: Four Scientists Respond
See discussion (124 comments, 201 points) - Archive
New Model of Evolution Reveals How Cooperation Evolves
See discussion (56 comments, 83 points) - Archive
Springer retracting 107 papers published in Tumor Biology with fake peer reviews
See discussion (34 comments, 98 points) - Archive
Does Science Advance One Funeral at a Time?
See discussion (82 comments, 171 points) - Archive
The importance of neutral null for understanding evolution
See discussion (32 comments, 95 points) - Archive
Young, talented and fed-up: scientists tell their stories
See discussion (177 comments, 248 points) - Archive
Poverty and social background remain huge barriers in scientific careers
See discussion (106 comments, 118 points) - Archive
We Should Not Accept Scientific Results That Have Not Been Repeated
See discussion (275 comments, 910 points) - Archive
Humans once opposed coffee and refrigeration: why we often hate new stuff
See discussion (271 comments, 308 points) - Archive
Let’s make peer review scientific
See discussion (141 comments, 279 points) - Archive
Bias Against Novelty in Science
See discussion (44 comments, 105 points) - Archive
Why Aren’t There More Scientists? Money
See discussion (85 comments, 99 points) - Archive
The man who studies the spread of ignorance
See discussion (104 comments, 134 points) - Archive
Scientific publications should be anonymous
See discussion (76 comments, 128 points) - Archive
Wikipedia is significantly amplifying the impact of Open Access publications
See discussion (3 comments, 101 points) - Archive
Denying Problems When We Don’t Like the Solutions
See discussion (126 comments, 117 points) - Archive
Are “Better” Ideas More Likely to Succeed? An Analysis of Startup Evaluation [pdf]
See discussion (30 comments, 81 points) - Archive
Psychologists Strike a Blow for Reproducibility (2013)
See discussion (27 comments, 84 points) - Archive
Publishing: The peer-review scam
See discussion (42 comments, 113 points) - Archive
Want to Win a Political Debate? Try Making a Weaker Argument
See discussion (61 comments, 97 points) - Archive
Half the Facts You Know Are Probably Wrong
See discussion (105 comments, 171 points) - Archive
A letter to the TEDx community on TEDx and bad science
See discussion (153 comments, 195 points) - Archive
Innocent man jailed for 8 months after DNA match
See discussion (45 comments, 92 points) - Archive
Bad science and bad statistics in the courtroom convict innocent people
See discussion (194 comments, 202 points) - Archive
Professor in Jordan sues sleuth who exposed citation anomalies
See discussion (11 comments, 97 points) - Archive
The Stanford Prison Experiment was hugely influential. We learned it was a fraud (2018)
See discussion (118 comments, 182 points) - Archive
Peer review is an honor-based system (2008)
See discussion (135 comments, 146 points) - Archive
Bad stuff going down at the American Sociological Association
See discussion (116 comments, 129 points) - Archive
Hair sample that put a man in prison turned out to be dog hair
See discussion (45 comments, 184 points) - Archive
Forensics Gone Wrong: When DNA Snares the Innocent (2016)
See discussion (101 comments, 98 points) - Archive
Researchers taking on fraudulent science
See discussion (85 comments, 124 points) - Archive
Dean of Engineering at University of Nevada wrote a paper that’s bad
See discussion (79 comments, 123 points) - Archive
Seaborn bug responsible for finding of declining disruptiveness in science
See discussion (72 comments, 82 points) - Archive
Retired detective: We got it wrong in Robert Roberson's death penalty case
See discussion (249 comments, 175 points) - Archive
Wiley shuts down 19 science journals and retracts 11,000 gobbledygook papers
See discussion (56 comments, 99 points) - Archive
New head of one of the world’s oldest universities organized a citation cartel
See discussion (131 comments, 242 points) - Archive