Consilience

Tradition and the Individual Talent

Poems, readings, poetry news and the entire 110-year archive of POETRY magazine.

Guest post: If you’re going to critique science, be scientific about it

Loren K. Mell Editor’s note: This post responds to a Feb. 13 article in The Atlantic, “The Scientific Literature Can’t Save Us Now,” written by Retraction Watch cofounders Adam Marcus and Ivan Oran…

Poets in the Machine

2024 marks the blog's 30th anniversary. Is it time to give popular online writing—from blogs to tweets and newsletters—the critical attention it deserves?

Pitfalls and chances in creating optimal conditions for openness and collaboration in science

Marion Poetz on what it takes to foster innovation in Science and how to make it more interesting for companies and organizations.

On “getting” poetry - The New Criterion

On deriving pleasure from poetry.

The Journal of Scientific Integrity

by Laura Luebbert and Lior Pachter Background (by LL) Four years ago, during the first year of my PhD at Caltech, I participated in a journal club organized by the lab I was rotating in. I was assi…

ScienceOpen

Ideal for sharing early results, building dialogue, and gaining recognition — all while staying flexible for future publication.

A budding discipline around how science gets read and judged - Aris

Scholarly publishing spent thirty years arguing about access. It has barely begun arguing about what readers do with the paper once they have it. At Aris we call that second argument scholarly interface design. Mike Morrison's community calls it ScienceUX. Either way it is becoming a field, and here is why it is worth your attention.

A New Paradigm for Scientific Publishing, Peer Review, and Impact Assessment

Scientific publishing and peer review have evolved little in three centuries, while the demands placed on them have grown profoundly. The growing role of artificial intelligence has underscored deep, systemic shortcomings of an aging system that has largely evaded innovation, a system whose origins are appallingly closer to the invention of the printing press than to the internet. We can do better – much better. This article is intended as the beginning of a communal experiment: a living document that critically reviews the modern academic publishing and peer-review system and presents a concrete framework to address what bibliometrics experts¹ have characterized as "the pervasive misapplication of indicators to the evaluation of scientific performance". Building on the Leiden Manifesto, DORA, and a body of scholarship spanning many disciplines and decades, we present a community-governed, non-profit platform organized around three trust-weighted impact factors, for articles, authors, and reviewers, with full algorithmic transparency, an open development log, and structural decoupling of credibility scoring from content moderation and from monetization. We invite the community to discuss, critique, and help shape it.

Pace Layers 02025 Annual Journal

Long Now’s annual print journal explores the ancient past and distant future of the present moment through essays, interviews, fiction, poetry, and visual art. The journal takes its name and shape from Long Now cofounder Stewart Brand’s pace layers framework — a tool for thinking about how civilizations work. [Learn more about Pace Layers](https://longnow.org/pacelayers/)

Peer Review Congress

JAMA: Remembering Drummond Rennie—Champion of Integrity in Science and Scientific Publication

Plaudit — How to Give More Than One Like to a Scientific Article | Challenges and Issues of Modern Science

Is it possible to give more than one like on Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, and other social networks? Have you ever wanted, just once, to “like with both hands”? If so — your wish has come true on the platform of our journal Challenges and Issues of Modern Science.

Imperfection – mamuso.dev

A (Mostly) Personal Journal

Read - Night Science

Itai and Martin have published – and continue to publish – about the main aspects of the creative scientific process and its thinking tools.

Sensemaking and Science Publishing | Ronen Tamari

Sensemaking as a new framework for understanding why science publishing/peer review is broken, and how to fix it