There's a tried and true strategy to article revision.
Preprints can cause their corresponding published articles to be (temporarily) dropped from the Google Scholar database.
Double-blind review sounds good in theory but runs into various obstacles in practice.
Don't send out a Doodle poll with 120 options.
Junior scientists need protection from vindictive senior PIs.
It's time to learn R Markdown.
This paper uses lots of math to say little of consequence.
Wickham has published a new package, dplyr, that will revolutionize data wrangling.
Should reviewers re-review the same article for a different journal?