The Scholarly Kitchen
Latest Post
Size and Discipline Bias in F1000 Journal Rankings
The rankings of journals based on F1000 scores reveals a strong bias against larger journals and those with little disciplinary overlap with the biosciences. Continue reading
Today's Specials and Featured Items
Is the decade-long trend in e, i, and x naming based on a deeper trend in how the world is coming together? Continue reading
Google once represented the spirit of Internet optimism distilled into a successful company. Now, with more cynical plays and shuttering experiments, what does Google’s new approach tell us about the Internet of tomorrow? Continue reading
Old intersections of libraries and book publishers don’t work in the e-book era, and the rapid adoption of e-readers has shown that new bargains are inevitable. Whether libraries and publishers belong together in that future isn’t clear. Continue reading
Academic publishers that are seeking to enhance their consumer-facing Web sites should follow these four steps and be sure to anchor the site in the company’s strategy. Continue reading
When it comes to discussions about access, the silent majority focused on doing science is presented with real choices, not all of which square with the scorched-earth rhetoric that too often dominates. Continue reading
The very real trade-offs inherent in Internet security have to faced directly, but politicians are avoiding these trade-offs as they talk about SOPA and PIPA. Continue reading
There are compelling reasons to create an online bookstore specializing in academic titles. Such a bookstore could be linked to physical community spaces and may even have a life as a component of library catalogs. Continue reading
Barnes & Noble can compete more effectively with Amazon by moving to a strategy of making its infrastructure available to numerous companies, many of which formerly saw B&N as a rival. Continue reading
As the deadline for responses to the OSTP RFI approaches, perhaps we should reflect on how the government can make its own research reports available in a more complete, direct, and affordable manner. Continue reading
Can tweets predict future citations? A study of article tweets raises validity and ethical concerns. Continue reading
A dialogue on patron-driven acquisitions by a librarian (Rick Anderson) and a publishing consultant (Joe Esposito). Patron-driven acquisitons may evolve into patron-driven access. But publishers ultimately will have to bless the plans. Continue reading
A longitudinal study shows most reviewers submit poorer quality reviews over time. Cognitive decline and competing responsibilities may help to explain why experience may be a liability in peer-review. Continue reading
As we continue to measure the number of papers, citations, and the combination, perhaps we should be measuring a much lower number — the number of studies that can be replicated after publication. Continue reading
eLife asserts that professional editors create more harm than good. But how do we know that? How can we know that? Or is this just an emotional argument based on anecdote and conjecture rather than fact? Continue reading
Who can judge quality or utility? How are library acquisition practices optimized? Continuing an earlier post, the tensions are now exposed by budgetary limitations, and the repercussions of shifting away from traditional acquisition practices will be felt for years to come. Continue reading
When authors think peer-review is about their chances of acceptance rather than the quality of their paper, it can lead to the wrong expectations and unproductive behaviors. Continue reading
Can a new open access journal that relies on working scientists to oversee its review process compete with other top-tier journals that employ professional editors? Continue reading
The collapse of Borders should be a wake-up call to publishers that assume that the core infrastructure of their legacy businesses will always be there to provide essential services. Continue reading
The rhetoric of “open” seeks to rally science to some higher state, but it’s not clear what “open science” means, why it’s any better, and what the risks of its adoption might be. Continue reading
We’ve lived long enough with the proposition that OA publishers compete with traditional publishers. Perhaps they do not. Some major indicators suggest a non-competitive coexistence. Continue reading
The governance of not-for-profit publishing entities plays a large role in those entities’ success or failure. Continue reading
In my last posting, I posed four questions brought to my mind by the Aaron Swartz case. Here, I propose what I think are reasonable answers to those questions. The result is kind of a long post, but hey, it’s the weekend. Tell your spouse that the yard work will have to wait; you’re busy helping to solve the fundamental structural problems of the scholarly information marketplace. Continue reading
Taxpayer access to US federally funded research results need not involve publishers giving away their product. An alternative mechanism is available, one that is already partially implemented. It is called the research report. Demands for free access to taxpayer funded research results are in full cry. The focus is on journal publishers and their product. … Continue reading
Authors
Kent Anderson
Phil Davis
Stewart Wills
Joseph Esposito
Ann Michael
David Crotty
Michael Clarke
Rick Anderson
David Smith
David Wojick
Tim Vines
The mission of the Society for Scholarly Publishing (SSP) is "[t]o advance scholarly publishing and communication, and the professional development of its members through education, collaboration, and networking." SSP established The Scholarly Kitchen blog in February 2008 to keep SSP members and interested parties aware of new developments in publishing.
......................................
The Scholarly Kitchen is a moderated and independent blog. Opinions on The Scholarly Kitchen are those of the authors. They are not necessarily those held by the Society for Scholarly Publishing nor by their respective employers.
Authors
The mission of the Society for Scholarly Publishing (SSP) is "[t]o advance scholarly publishing and communication, and the professional development of its members through education, collaboration, and networking." SSP established The Scholarly Kitchen blog in February 2008 to keep SSP members and interested parties aware of new developments in publishing.
......................................
The Scholarly Kitchen is a moderated and independent blog. Opinions on The Scholarly Kitchen are those of the authors. They are not necessarily those held by the Society for Scholarly Publishing nor by their respective employers.
