What’s Hot and Cooking In Scholarly Publishing
Why is the English language so filled with nautical terms?
If we want to broaden the audience base for research outputs, then authors need to explore more visual formats for readers to consume. The graphical abstract is one such format.
AI offers great potential, but also raises significant concerns when it comes to its use in peer review. Experimentation with AI is needed to find the right role for it in the process.
In this post, Alice Meadows shares some thoughts about PLOS’s recently announced R&D project to help overcome the lack of recognition for Open Science contributions, and the lack of affordability for researchers.
We often think of bullying as a childhood issue, but people can take that behavior to the workplace. The scourge of workplace bullying, and its harmful effects on mental health, needs to be recognized and addressed.
Once again, Nikon’s Small World in Motion video microscopy competition winners are remarkable.
In today’s post Alice Meadows shares a case study of community engagement in Ireland as part of the country’s plans to develop a national persistent identifier (PID) strategy
Users (human and machine) are accessing scholarly content in new ways, challenging traditional usage analytics models. In this guest post, Tim Lloyd outlines the challenges ahead in quantifying usage.
Daniel Dollar offers an update on the work being done by Research4Life and a call for action.
Several weeks ago, the Internet Archive lost its appeal of the lawsuit brought by a group of publishers opposed to its controlled digital lending programs. Roger Schonfeld examines what can be learned from this fair use defeat.
IOP Publishing offers a short video that draws attention to the importance of professional and constructive peer reviews.
The real challenge in implementing new peer review technologies lies in managing the human and organizational changes required to make these innovations stick. Three experts share their insights into how they are leading their teams through these transformative processes.
In today’s Peer Review Week post we hear perspectives on innovation and technology in peer review from a diverse group of users from different countries and disciplines.
Peer review needs reform. AI systems can act as assistants, providing valuable feedback for both reviewers and editors.
Are there ways to use AI in the research workflow to speed up the peer review process — and, while we’re at it, to address some of the other problems around bias and quality?
Today Alice Meadows, Jasmine Wallace, and Karin Wulf officially kick off a week of posts to celebrate Peer Review Week 2024 on the Kitchen with their thoughts on the promise and pitfalls of innovation and technology in peer review