about
Do pressures to publish increase scientists' bias? An empirical support from US States Data"Positive" results increase down the Hierarchy of the SciencesHow many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey dataNegative results are disappearing from most disciplines and countriesConservative Tests under Satisficing Models of Publication BiasUS studies may overestimate effect sizes in softer researchBibliometric Evidence for a Hierarchy of the SciencesMeta-research: Evaluation and Improvement of Research Methods and PracticesResearchers' Individual Publication Rate Has Not Increased in a Century.Redefine misconduct as distorted reporting.Why growing retractions are (mostly) a good signMisconduct Policies, Academic Culture and Career Stage, Not Gender or Pressures to Publish, Affect Scientific Integrity.Scientists Admitting to Plagiarism: A Meta-analysis of Surveys.We need more research on causes and consequences, as well as on solutions.What does research reproducibility mean?Set up a 'self-retraction' system for honest errors.Reply to Nuijten et al.: Reanalyses actually confirm that US studies overestimate effects in softer research.Publishing: Rise in retractions is a signal of integrity.Testing Hypotheses on Risk Factors for Scientific Misconduct via Matched-Control Analysis of Papers Containing Problematic Image Duplications.Reproductive constraints, direct fitness and indirect fitness benefits explain helping behaviour in the primitively eusocial wasp, Polistes canadensis.A theory and methodology to quantify knowledgeA theory and methodology to quantify knowledgeWhy Do Scientists Fabricate And Falsify Data? A Matched-Control Analysis Of Papers Containing Problematic Image DuplicationsAny publicity is better than none: newspaper coverage increases citations, in the UK more than in ItalyPositive results receive more citations, but only in some disciplinesEpicuticular lipids and fertility in primitively social wasps (Hymenoptera Stenogastrinae)Three new host species of the social wasp parasite, Polistes atrimandibularis (Hymenoptera, Vespidae)A theory and methodology to quantify knowledge.
P50
Q21090019-C913F57E-98E1-46C9-A8FA-12CC7D7F3B9DQ21136404-77A417B5-28C3-4CEC-BF21-AAF36196FC68Q21143770-6836EF41-F67E-4F84-9B59-1DB34BCDEE1EQ24273200-72BBFF36-7434-4B74-848C-108151E82179Q24288636-0DC358F9-B491-4F3C-B55B-9ABD7AEC31D8Q24289257-0E97EA21-6CD7-4CBD-BBAF-FF6751D04D47Q27313418-FDFFE465-1AE4-4E97-9C02-42DD43FC2E84Q28606958-BFCF44D4-A3D9-4FE4-A825-D991E5D2B925Q30385483-EFD80608-5695-454B-AF3E-7611A4ABBFF3Q34327687-840CCB0A-F373-442A-BFB3-6E815CAF2DC3Q35060121-B0D6C94A-0847-417F-93B3-9987987EB10FQ35665984-54F6F6D8-57C4-4EAC-946C-9C7E6A27BF35Q38263435-97B92768-B66B-468E-9305-39F642F6D95AQ38291098-E28049D9-B34A-4FAB-A3F4-E44FDB7DAAF2Q38851031-B8964641-9063-4B09-A280-BEAB8437E60AQ39893450-B472C7B4-E6C3-4A01-A8BB-A5366E775C3EQ42432494-41421F16-12A3-4B3B-91C4-E05B171DAF2FQ48868393-48B070EB-5239-4F60-BD3E-7681D30AFD8AQ49826341-AFADB167-FCD4-4D7E-BEAF-288D89997A34Q52701260-62E7C0C0-6F66-48B3-B345-35C018E75E6FQ57390448-9C3CBA8A-E623-4A60-AA34-1C03A3777A6AQ57390451-A2AE2F41-13DF-47E2-A6F5-455721EF093CQ57390455-8DD92594-2677-4C59-8A51-93C56F4CC720Q57390474-2F18F5B7-E743-4EB4-8A63-93B60BFAB9A9Q57390479-A21D3E73-3261-4292-AD3B-074EF4C9FC2AQ59209948-5659191B-178C-4086-ADDF-6C212C2F1C1FQ60163947-8F8AACE1-BF55-4EE5-B874-CCF4B693836EQ64890091-2A5B84BE-F93A-4B2E-818A-7C077386901C
P50
description
hulumtues
@sq
researcher
@en
wetenschapper
@nl
հետազոտող
@hy
name
Daniele Fanelli
@ast
Daniele Fanelli
@en
Daniele Fanelli
@es
Daniele Fanelli
@fr
Daniele Fanelli
@nl
Daniele Fanelli
@sl
type
label
Daniele Fanelli
@ast
Daniele Fanelli
@en
Daniele Fanelli
@es
Daniele Fanelli
@fr
Daniele Fanelli
@nl
Daniele Fanelli
@sl
prefLabel
Daniele Fanelli
@ast
Daniele Fanelli
@en
Daniele Fanelli
@es
Daniele Fanelli
@fr
Daniele Fanelli
@nl
Daniele Fanelli
@sl
P106
P1153
26644812800
P21
P31
P496
0000-0003-1780-1958