Scientific Communication and Education

  1. LGBTQ+ realities in the biological sciences

    1. Katelyn M. Cooper
    2. Carly A. Busch
    3. Alice Accorsi
    4. Derek A. Applewhite
    5. Parth B. Bhanderi
    6. Bruno da Rocha-Azevedo
    7. Abhijit Deb Roy
    8. Joseph P. Campanale
    9. Fred Chang
    10. Jerry E. Chipuk
    11. Lee A. Ligon
    12. G.W. Gant Luxton
    13. Austin J. Graham
    14. Camila Hochman-Mendez
    15. Imge Ozugergin
    16. Zachory M. Park
    17. Claire M. Thomas
    18. Alex M. Valm
    19. Hongxian Zhu
    20. Rebecca S. Alvania

    Reviewed by preLights

    1 evaluationAppears in 1 listLatest version Latest activity

  2. Fast & Fair peer review: a pilot study demonstrating feasibility of rapid, high-quality peer review in a biology journal

    1. Daniel A. Gorelick
    2. Alejandra Clark

    Reviewed by PREreview

    1 evaluationAppears in 2 listsLatest version Latest activity

  3. A ChatGPT-Assisted Reading Protocol for Undergraduate Research Students

    1. Marcus Sambar
    2. Gonzalo R. Vázquez
    3. Anne V. Vázquez
    4. Frank X. Vázquez

    Reviewed by preLights

    1 evaluationAppears in 2 listsLatest version Latest activity

  4. Biology exams rarely use visual models to engage higher-order cognitive skills

    1. Crystal Uminski
    2. Christian Cammarota
    3. Brian A. Couch
    4. L. Kate Wright
    5. Dina L. Newman

    Reviewed by PREreview

    1 evaluationAppears in 1 listLatest version Latest activity

  5. Quantifying Data Distortion in Bar Graphs in Biological Research

    1. Teng-Jui Lin
    2. Markita P. Landry

    Reviewed by Arcadia Science

    4 evaluationsAppears in 1 listLatest version Latest activity

  6. From impact metrics and open science to communicating research: Journalists’ awareness of academic controversies

    1. Alice Fleerackers
    2. Laura L. Moorhead
    3. Juan Pablo Alperin
    4. Michelle Riedlinger
    5. Lauren A. Maggio

    Reviewed by preLights

    1 evaluationAppears in 1 listLatest version Latest activity

  7. Empowering future scientists: mentors employ various strategies to engage students in professional science disciplinary literacy practices

    1. Trisha Minocha
    2. Tanya Bhagatwala
    3. Gwendolyn Mirzoyan
    4. Gary McDowell
    5. Sarah C. Fankhauser

    Reviewed by PREreview

    2 evaluationsAppears in 3 listsLatest version Latest activity

  8. An updated and expanded characterization of the biological sciences academic job market

    1. Brooklynn Flynn
    2. Ariangela J. Kozik
    3. You Cheng
    4. Ada K. Hagan
    5. Jennifer Ng
    6. Christopher T. Smith
    7. Amanda Haage
    8. Nafisa M. Jadavji

    Reviewed by preLights

    1 evaluationAppears in 1 listLatest version Latest activity

  9. Improved science communication and student gains from an undergraduate biomedical research experience

    1. Donna Ward
    2. Yueh-Ying Han
    3. Christopher Qoyawayma
    4. April Dukes
    5. T. Brooke McClendon
    6. Michelle L. Manni

    Reviewed by PREreview

    1 evaluationAppears in 1 listLatest version Latest activity

  10. Female-dominated disciplines have lower evaluated research quality and funding success rates, for men and women

    1. Alex James
    2. Franca Buelow
    3. Liam Gibson
    4. Ann Brower

    • Curated by eLife

      eLife Assessment

      This study provides convincing evidence that the quality of research in female-dominated fields of research is systematically undervalued by the research community. The authors' findings are based on analyses of data from a research assessment exercise in New Zealand and data on funding success rates in Australia, Canada, the European Union and the United Kingdom. This work is an important contribution to the discourse on gender biases in academia, underlining the pervasive influence of gender on whole fields of research, as well as on individual researchers.

    Reviewed by eLife

    7 evaluationsAppears in 1 listLatest version Latest activity
Previous Page 2 of 15 Next