Catálogo de publicaciones - revistas

<jats:p>Society may strip honors if misconduct has been found.</jats:p>

<jats:p>Fossils show how lumbar vertebrae were freed up to adapt to myriad lifestyles.</jats:p>

<jats:p>Increasingly skilled artificial intelligence could hold clues to human sensory systems.</jats:p>

<jats:p>A growing number of scientists is studying science itself.</jats:p>

<jats:p>"Journalologists" use scientific methods to study publishing. Is their work improving science?</jats:p>

<jats:p>Meta-analyses were supposed to end scientific debates. Often, they only cause more controversy.</jats:p>

<jats:p>In its drive to expose weaknesses in science, an up-and-coming research group doesn't mind stepping on some toes.</jats:p>

<jats:p>A simple strategy to avoid bias—declaring in advance what you will study, and how—is rapidly catching on.</jats:p>

<jats:p> Climb atop shoulders and wait for funerals. That, suggested Newton and then Planck, is how science advances (more or less). We've come far since then, but many notions about how people and practices, policies, and resources influence the course of science are still more rooted in traditions and intuitions than in evidence. We can and must do better, lest we resign ourselves to “intuition-based policy” when making decisions and investments aimed at driving scientific progress. <jats:italic>Science</jats:italic> invited experts to highlight key aspects of the scientific enterprise that are steadily yielding to empirical investigation—and to explain how Newton and Planck got it right (and Einstein got it wrong). — <jats:bold>Brad Wible</jats:bold> </jats:p>

<jats:p> Steroid biomarkers show that the Ediacaran fossil <jats:italic>Dickinsonia</jats:italic> was an animal </jats:p>