The Scholarly Kitchen
F1000 Research
Redundant and Expensive – How F1000 Research’s Model Reveals the Root Problems of PubMed Central
More internal PubMed Central emails show quite clearly that PMC is wasting taxpayers’ money solving problems publishers have already solved. Continue reading
Seeking Acceptance at F1000 Research — Early Problems With Identity and Outsourced Authority
Articles are published before they’re reviewed; doubts about a paper are viewed as a positive status; papers only need to contain “science;” review and revision can continue forever; and PubMed Central is their certifying entity. Welcome to the world of F1000 Research. Continue reading
How Rigorous Is the Post-publication Review Process at F1000 Research?
Comparing the length of post-publication peer reviews in F1000 Research to those done pre-publication in four major medical journals shows authors are less likely to receive constructive or substantial criticism with F1000 Research reviews, despite a highly academic reviewer pool. Continue reading
Post-Publication Peer Review: What Value Do Usage-Based Metrics Offer?
A PLoS ONE article recently went viral, hitting the front page of Reddit and garnering an amazing amount of reader interest. This was great news for the journal and the paper’s authors, but raises questions for the notion of post-publication peer review. As Kent Anderson recently discussed, the idea of post-publication peer review is nothing … Continue reading
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.
