Fanelli D (2019) A theory and methodology to quantify knowledge. Royal Society Open Science - doi.org/10.1098/rsos.181055
Fanelli D (2018) Is science really facing a reproducibility crisis, and do we need it to? PNAS –doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1708272114
Fanelli D, Costas R, Fang FC, Casadevall A, Bik EM (2018) Testing hypotheses on risk factors for scientific misconduct via matched-control analysis of papers containing problematic image duplications. Science and Engineering Ethics - doi.org/10.1007/s11948-018-0023-7
Fanelli D, Ioannidis JPA, Goodman SN (2018) Improving the integrity of published science: an expanded taxonomy of retractions and corrections. European Journal of Clinical Investigation – 10.1111/eci.12898
Fanelli D, Costas R, Fang FC, Casadevall A, Bik EM (2017). Why do scientists fabricate and falsify data? A matched-control analysis of papers containing problematic image duplications. bioRxiv - doi.org/10.1101/126805
Fanelli D, Costas R, Ioannidis JPA (2017) Meta-assessment of bias in science. PNAS - 10.1073/pnas.1618569114
Hosseini M, Hilhorst M, de Beaufort I, Fanelli D (2017) Doing the Right Thing: A Qualitative Investigation of Retractions Due to Unintentional Error. Science and Engineering Ethics - 10.1007/s11948-017-9894-2
Goodman S, Fanelli D, Ioannidis JPA (2016) What does reproducibility mean? Science Translational Medicine - 10.1126/scitranslmed.aaf5027
Fanelli D (2016) Set up a 'self-retraction' system for honest errors. Nature - 10.1038/531415a
Fanelli D & V Larivière (2016) Scientists' individual publication rate has not increased in a century. PLoS ONE - 10.1371/journal.pone.0149504
McCrary J, Christensen G & Fanelli D (2016) Conservative Tests under Satisficing Models of Publication Bias. PLoS ONE -10.1371/journal.pone.0149590
Fanelli D & Larivière V (2015). Are scientists really publishing more? Proceedings of the15th International Society of Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference, Istanbul, Turkey.
Ioannidis JPA, Fanelli D, Drake Dunne D, Goodman SN (2015). Meta-research: Evaluation and improvement of research methods and practices. PLoS Biology -DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002264
Fanelli D, Costas R and Larivière V (2015). Misconduct Policies, Academic Culture and Career Stage, Not Gender or Pressures to Publish, Affect Scientific Integrity. PLoS ONE - DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0127556
Fanelli D (2015) We need more research on causes and consequences, as well as on solutions. Addiction - 10.1111/add.12772
Pupovac V & Fanelli D (2015) Scientists admitting to plagiarism: a meta-analysis of surveys. Science and Engineering Ethics - 10.1007/s11948-014-9600-6
Yu B & Fanelli D (2014) Classifying Negative Findings in Biomedical Publications. Proceedings of the BioNLP 2014, Workshop on Biomedical Natural Language Processing.
Fanelli D (2014) Publishing: rise in retractions is a signal of integrity. Nature - doi:10.1038/509033a
Fanelli D & Ioannidis JPA (2014) Re-analyses actually confirm that US studies may overestimate effect sizes in softer research. PNAS - DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1322565111
Fanelli D (2013) Why growing retractions are (mostly) a good sign. PLoS Medicine - DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001563
Fanelli D & Ioannidis JPA (2013) US studies may overestimate effect sizes in softer research. PNAS - DOI:10.1073/pnas.1302997110
Fanelli D & Glanzel W (2013) Bibliometric evidence for a Hierarchy of the Sciences. PLoS ONE - DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0066938
Fanelli D (2013) Only reporting guidelines can save (soft) science. European Journal of Personality 27(2): 124
Fanelli D (2013) Redefine misconduct as distorted reporting. Nature - DOI:10.1038/494149a
Fanelli D (2013) Positive results receive more citations, but only in some disciplines. Scientometrics - DOI:10.1007/s11192-012-0757-y
Fanelli D (2012) Any publicity is better than none: newspaper coverage increases citations, in the UK more than in Italy. Scientometrics - DOI:10.1007/s11192-012-0925-0
Fanelli D (2012) Negative results are disappearing from most disciplines and countries. Scientometrics - DOI:10.1007/s11192-011-0494-7
Fanelli D (2010) Do pressures to publish increase scientists' bias? An empirical support from US states data. PLoS ONE - DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0010271
Fanelli D (2010) "Positive" results increase down the Hierarchy of the Sciences. PLoS ONE - DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0010068
Fanelli D (2009) How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS ONE - DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0005738