Peer Review

This category contains 318 posts

Going APE — Thoughts and Insights with a European Perspective

The Academic Publishing in Europe (APE) meeting in Europe is 10 years old, but feels as fresh and frisky as some of the meetings in the US used to. This report touches on some of the most interesting threads of two days’ worth of interesting presentations and conversations. Continue reading

University of California Press Introduces New Open Access Publishing Programs

The University of California Press has announced two new open access publishing initiatives, one a monographs program and the other an OA mega journal. Here UCP director Alison Mudditt answers some questions posed by the Kitchen about these new initiatives. Continue reading

Peer Review — Recognition Wanted!

Despite recent criticisms, peer review remains central to scholarly communication – but identifying and maintaining a steady stream of trained and knowledgeable peer reviewers is increasingly challenging. With researchers under more pressure than ever to publish or perish, some journal editors would like to see more support and recognition for peer review from their institutions and funders. Continue reading

Making a Case for Open Access

Some professional societies need to be persuaded that open access publishing may be in their interest. The best way to do this is to provide data on the publishing ecosystem, including such things as the number of articles of interest to a society that appear in other venues and the practical implications of not having an OA option for prospective authors. Continue reading

Exaggerated Claims — Has “Publish or Perish” Become “Publicize or Perish”?

A recent study finds that academic press offices exaggerate claims in their press releases about published research. Worse, the vast majority of these find their way into subsequent reporting. Continue reading

Buried in the Matryoshka — Unpacking the “Value Add” of Peer Review

Publishers often slap labels on activities that are complex, expensive, and high-value. Worse, we often accept people calling these activities “value-add” when they are core functions of how scientific information shared. Continue reading

Slow and Steady — Taking the Time to Think in the Age of Rapid Publishing Cycles

Simple things are often more complex than we initially think, and the push for faster publication may be an expensive and risky trend to follow too much further. Continue reading

The Size of the Open Access Market

A report from Simba Information tallies the total value of the open access marketplace, putting OA at 2.3% of the total market for STM journals. It documents as well, without comment, that more and more OA activity is the business of for-profit companies. Continue reading

Virtual Reality Research — Some Early Problems with Data Reanalysis and Risks of Open Data

The idea of “reanalysis” needs to be rethought, if recent examples are any indication of what this trend could do to science. Continue reading

Stick To Your Ribs: What Does A Scientist Want?

Revisiting Joe Esposito’s post on the real world concerns of the research community. Although many people claim to know what scientists want, the author’s own ongoing survey has come up with results that are at odds with most conventional wisdom. This post summarizes those findings and identifies a near-universal view held by many scientists. Continue reading

Side Dishes by Stewart Wills

Find Posts by Category

Find Posts by Date

January 2015
S M T W T F S
« Dec    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

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 16,220 other followers