Peer Review

This category contains 304 posts

Instruction Junction — The Ballooning Lists of Editorial Policies, and the Burdens They Create

Long “Instructions to Authors” filled with ancillary policies and undifferentiated requirements don’t help authors, staff, or editors. As the graveyard for unmade decisions, they’ve only gotten longer and more opaque. Maybe it’s time to clean yours up! Continue reading

Housecleaning at the Directory of Open Access Journals

The DOAJ is kicking out hundreds of predatory and scam publishers that found their way into the directory, and tightening standards to ensure that they don’t sneak back in. Which makes things a bit awkward for a community that, for years, has been insisting that predatory OA publishing isn’t a problem worth worrying about. Continue reading

A Day at the Beach — How the Messiness and Unpredictability of Journals Thwart Granularity

Attempts to use new measurements to more finely predict or represent journal quality are bound to falter because of some qualities inherent to journals themselves. Continue reading

Your Question for the Day — What Is “Peer Review”?

A recent “Slate” article shows what can go wrong when we talk about “peer review” as if we all share a common definition about an unchanging phenomenon. Continue reading

Trust But Verify — Identity Fraud and Exploitation of the Trust Economy in Scholarly Publishing

A ruse to self-review and self-recommend papers for publication leads to 60 retractions. Can we find a way to prevent this kind of identity fraud and its consequences? Continue reading

Open Access Publication Gains Acceptance With Authors, Licenses Still Problematic

A recent survey of authors by Taylor and Francis reveals growing acceptance of open access publishing; however, Creative Commons licensing may still pose a problem. Continue reading

The Business Model is a Community Affair

Drawing on a presentation from the recent AAUP annual conference, this post argues that the business of publishing scholarly books requires reciprocal arrangements among many publishers. This system is undermined by free riders. Continue reading

This Just In from the 1990s — We’re Doomed, Doomed, Doomed, Sayeth the Editor of VentureBeat

A Silicon Valley journalist has seen open access and deemed it disruptive. He’s 15+ years and scads of evidence behind the times, as we enter the post-disruption era. Continue reading

Author vs. Author: The Authors Guild and the Authors Alliance Set to Duke It Out?

The emergence of the Authors Alliance is causing consternation among some members of the traditional publishing community, most notably the Authors Guild, which has already issued a sharply-worded critique. But what is the Alliance actually going to do? They’re not really saying. Continue reading

What Motivates Reviewers? An Experiment in Economics

Shorter deadlines, email reminders, and cash incentives can speed up the peer review process and minimize unintended effects, a recent study suggests. Can it work for other disciplines? Continue reading

Side Dishes by Stewart Wills

Find Posts by Category

Find Posts by Date

September 2014
S M T W T F S
« Aug    
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930  

The Scholarly Kitchen on Twitter

SSP_LOGO
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.
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 13,701 other followers