From the editors of Nature:
As part of a broader effort to improve reporting quality, Nature and the Nature journals introduced a reporting checklist for life-sciences papers in 2013. This asked authors to reveal some key details of experimental design. Last year, this checklist evolved into a broader reporting-summary document that is published alongside manuscripts to promote greater transparency.
We have now developed two new versions of the reporting summary: one for the behavioural and social sciences, launching this week, and one for ecology, evolution and environment (EEE) research, to follow later this month. Authors will be prompted to use these documents to provide important details of study design, data collection and analysis before papers are sent out for review. More.
Is there a human system that other humans cannot break? Isn’t that why we need morality, not just more rules?
See also: Peer review 9-11: China leads the world in biomedical fraud./ But maybe that’s just because China is bigger than most Western nations. The underlying problem is probably philosophical.
Peer review “unscientific”: Tough words from editor of Nature