PLOS

This tag is associated with 66 posts

The Mixed Marriage of For-profit and Not-for-profit Publishing

Scholarly publishing is virtually unique in that it has significant representation by both for-profit and not-for-profit publishers. This alters the very nature of this segment of publishing, making the not-for-profits more business-like and forcing the for-profits to behave at times like mission-based organizations. Continue reading

Sexism in Peer Review

When sexist comments make it into a technical review of a research article, journal editors and publishers are wise to take a moment and think about processes for finding, responding to, and eradicating this behavior. Continue reading

The Context of Scientific Publishing

A presentation to a scientific society on the current environment that STM publishers have to work in. Five issues are identified: regulatory matters, new technology, the structure of the marketplace, competition, and governance. Continue reading

The Elephant in the Room Is a Phone

Publishers have underestimated how disruptive mobile technology potentially can be. We are likely to see an entirely new ecosystem develop with the smart phone at the center. 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

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

Stick to Your Ribs: Breaking the Silence Around Premature Quantification

Revisiting Joe Esposito’s 2010 post which discussed how improper use of financial analysis can obscure problems in strategy, a problem faced by for-profit and not-for-profit organizations alike. Continue reading

Data Detectives: Investigating What is, and What is Not, Measured

Businesses are using more data than ever to inform decision making. While the truly large Big Data may be limited to the likes of Google, Amazon, and Facebook, publishers are nonetheless managing more data than ever before. While the technical challenges may be less daunting with smaller data sets, there remain challenges in interpreting data and in using it to make informed decisions. Perhaps the most daunting challenge is in understanding the limitations of the dataset: What is being measured and, just as importantly, what is not being measured? What inferences and conclusions can be drawn and what is mere conjecture? Where are the bricks and mortar solid and where does the foundation give way beneath our feet? Continue reading

Publishing Viewed from Santa’s Crystal Ball

Some predictions about the future of scholarly publishing, which acknowledges the continuing central role of the major STM publishers. Continue reading

Parting Company with Jeffrey Beall

Although Jeffrey Beall has done us all a good service by coming up with his list of predatory publishers, his arguments against open access publishing have become shrill and reveal that he is expressing a political viewpoint that obscures the many gradations of opinion concerning scholarly publishing. Continue reading

How PLoS ONE Can Have It All

PLoS has an interesting opportunity before it to push its most robust service, PLoS ONE, very aggressively for growth. PLoS can do this by lowering the cost of publishing fees, which would make it increasingly hard for other publishers to match them for a Gold OA service. This could result in PLoS ONE becoming the default OA publishing option for all STM publishing. Continue reading

The Natural Limits of Gold Open Access

Gold open access publishing has proved to be successful, but it has certain limitations. This essay probes what those limitations are, but it argues that OA’s limitations do not outweigh its strengths. Gold OA most usefully coexists with traditional publishing models. Continue reading

A Snapshot of the Scientific and Technical Publishing Market

A new report from Simba surveys the current scientific and technical publishing markets. These segments are essentially flat. Incumbents are seeking growth elsewhere. Interestingly, open access has not had much of an impact on the revenue of traditional publications. Continue reading

When It Comes to Green OA, Nice Guys Finish Last

Green Open Access can lead to the cancellation of subscriptions to journals. The environment for OA, however, is full of nuance and resists easy characterization. Continue reading

What Does a Scientist Want?

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

Open Access and Professional Societies

Let’s imagine that open access publishing becomes the norm. What will the implications be? One implication is that it will likely create significant pressure on professional societies, which will seek new business arrangements to augment their income and keep their society together. Continue reading

The Persistent Lure of the Impact Factor–Even for PLOS ONE

Despite a growing anti-Impact Factor movement, a quick look at readership and search query data shows a continued growth of interest in knowing journals’ Impact Factors, even for the journal where it may be the least relevant. Continue reading

Game of Papers: eLife, BMC, PLoS and EMBO Announce New Peer Review Consortium

eLife, BioMed Central (BMC), the Public Library of Science (PLoS), and the European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO) will be forming a new peer review consortium based around the concept of what eLife calls “portable peer review.” Continue reading

PLoS, Stakeholders, and Shareholders

PLoS has announced the departure of both its CEO and CFO, but has provided no explanation of what led to the management change. PLoS should explain the situation to all its shareholders. Continue reading

Institutional Repository Study Is Recast in UK Political Light

How a publisher study of institutional repositories is used against those who created it. Continue reading

Side Dishes by Stewart Wills

Find Posts by Category

Find Posts by Date

July 2015
S M T W T F S
« Jun    
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  

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 18,587 other followers