Explore the vast range of titles available.

We reflect on our experience during a ten-week fellowship at a university in the Global South. Colleagues who participate in such collaborations need to be culturally competent and adopt culturally relevant pedagogical practices as they engage their host institutions. Those returning from the diaspora can experience culture shock in the culture in which they grew up after being away. Collaborations and relationships take commitment and time to build, and this should start early. Culturally informed notions of care are important for both partners. Being well emotionally, socially, and physically enables one to research and teach effectively, as environmental and social factors will arise that can affect one's mental state. Autoethnographic methodology is a valuable way to begin to hear the perceptions and experiences of partners in the Global South.

This paper highlights war effects on publication activities and scientific interests of Ukrainian researchers. Moreover, it presents the moods and motives of Ukrainian scientists regarding their scientific activity and the publication of their results in academic journals. The research method was a survey (Google Forms) distributed through Facebook professional groups “Ukrainian Scientists Worldwide,” “Ukrainian cuisine of scientific publications,” “Scientific Conferences and Publications,” and “Higher School and Science of Ukraine: Disintegration or Blossoming?” 690 Ukrainian scientists took part in the survey. Only 35.7% of the respondents stated that the war did not affect their research process. Results from respondents demonstrated that 27.7% of the respondents changed their scientific interests because of full-scale Russian aggression. Furthermore, scientists have psychological problems due to the loss of home, relatives, and relocation. The survey showed that motivation for publishing scientific articles varies from informing colleagues of their scientific results, scientific interest to motives distant from scientific values – “fulfillment of the requirements of the institution where I work,” “I do not want to be fired,” etc. 20.0% of the respondents noted that they had not got any motivation for scientific activity and publishing. At the same time, most scientists consider state security, debunking the propaganda of the Russian Federation, economic development, military medicine, ecology, education, social sphere, and agriculture to be the leading research areas. They also see the need to raise public awareness of the role of science and synchronize current multidisciplinary scientific research.

Access to analytical code is essential for transparent and reproducible research. We review the state of code availability in ecology using a random sample of 346 nonmolecular articles published between 2015 and 2019 under mandatory or encouraged code-sharing policies. Our results call for urgent action to increase code availability: only 27% of eligible articles were accompanied by code. In contrast, data were available for 79% of eligible articles, highlighting that code availability is an important limiting factor for computational reproducibility in ecology. Although the percentage of ecological journals with mandatory or encouraged code-sharing policies has increased considerably, from 15% in 2015 to 75% in 2020, our results show that code-sharing policies are not adhered to by most authors. We hope these results will encourage journals, institutions, funding agencies, and researchers to address this alarming situation.

Emotions are essential but little understood components of research; they catalyze and sustain creative scientific work and fuel the scientific and intellectual social movements (SIMs) that propel scientific change. Adopting a micro-sociological focus, we examine how emotions shape two intellectual processes central to all scientific work: conceiving creative ideas and managing skepticism. We illustrate these processes through a longitudinal study of the Resilience Alliance, a tightly networked coherent group collaborating at the center of a burgeoning scientific social movement in the environmental sciences. We show how emotions structured and were structured by the group's growth and development, and how socio-emotive processes facilitated the rapid production of highly creative science and helped overcome skepticism by outsiders. Hot spots and hot moments—that is, brief but intense periods of collaboration undertaken in remote and isolated settings—fueled the group's scientific performance and drove the SIM. Paradoxically, however, the same socio-emotive processes that ignited and sustained creative scientific research also made skepticism more likely to occur and more difficult to manage. Similarly, emotions and social bonding were essential for the group's growth and development, but increased size and diversity have the potential to erode the affective culture that generated initial successes.