Professor Sophie Scott is at the Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London. She is interested in the neurobiology of speech perception, including the evolution of speech and recovery from aphasia (see all evaluations related to aphasia on the F1000 website). She works on on dyslexia and processing of emotional information in the voice, and…
As you might have seen, I’ve been asking Faculty Members and authors of evaluated papers to say a little about their current research to camera. Recently, Quinn Mitrovich has been talking about intron loss, for example.
This week’s news includes evidence that the autism-vaccine linking research was fraudulent, survey results showing that consumers will pay good money for diagnostic genetic tests, a new study in the field of synthetic biology, an analysis of the genetic abnormalities in stem cell lines, the winners of the UK’s New Years Honours, and a genetic…
It’s going to be a good year. Back at the beginning of December I tipped you off that we were approaching a quite amazing statistic, the publication of our 100,000th evaluation. I’m now happy to let you know that #100,000 went live on Tuesday this week: High CO2 enhances the competitive strength of seaweeds over…
We published an evaluation in November from Guilhem Janbon at the Institut Pasteur, Paris, of a paper that reported a surprising new mechanism for evolutionary intron loss (free link to F1000 evaluation: you can read the original paper in Science).
It is with regret that we mark the death of Mark A. Smith, PhD, Professor of Pathology at Case Western Reserve University, on 19 December 2010 at the age of 46. Mark was a Member of our Psychiatry Faculty (Alzheimer’s Disease) since 28 July 2008, writing over 30 evaluations. He authored over 600 peer-reviewed manuscripts…
Guest post by Chris Dieni Happy New Year! It’s often said that in order to move forward, you need to look back. We’ve just rung in a brand new year: 2011 has barely begun and yet, many of us are already booked to attend conferences, have deadlines to meet for grant applications, are scheduled to…
You’ve just gotten the rejection back, and it stings. Your reviewers wrote about all sorts of technical issues with your proposal. You scrambled to fix those issues – only to receive another rejection with a different set of “issues”. Are your reviewers insane?
Science funding boost overlooked On Tuesday, December 21st, Congress passed the America COMPETES Act, long-awaited legislation calling for $46 billion in science and technology research funding over the next three years — a $7.4 billion increase over 2010 levels. The boon for US science, however, received little attention from media outlets or even the President…
In a New Yorker article published last month and recently evaluated by F1000, Jonah Lehrer describes an effect that has plagued a variety of scientific disciplines: The more times researchers try to replicate a given result, the less robust the effect. The phenomenon draws into question not only the dwindling findings themselves, but the scientific…
4
