Guest Post: Lettie Conrad on Metadata Promiscuity and the Researcher Experience
The pathways into academic material are diverse and the researcher experiences (RX) are quite variable. How can a publisher best open up its content for discovery?
The pathways into academic material are diverse and the researcher experiences (RX) are quite variable. How can a publisher best open up its content for discovery?
The university press world is ruminating on its relevance in a broader community that does not always show strong report for press activity. Different presses have identified a number of approaches to the problem of increasing relevance.
An expert takes a look at the scientific accuracy of dinosaur toys.
Smaller independent and society publishers are finding it increasingly difficult to compete with the economies of scale around production, technology, and (most important) institutional sales that can be brought to bear by a large publisher. If you are a society that has been self-publishing for many decades, such effects may appear as only a recent headwind in a long publishing tradition. This headwind, however, is most likely not a temporary zephyr but rather a permanent fixture of the STM and scholarly publishing landscape, and one that will only increase in intensity. To understand why, it is helpful to look at the two vectors on which scale operates in STM and scholarly publishing: horizontal and vertical. While horizontal scale has long been the province of commercial publishers, society publishers are typically organized to take advantage of vertical scale. The headwinds are presently blowing along the horizontal plane, from the perspective of the society publisher.
Michael Clarke looks at some of the growth avenues in scholarly communications.
When we talk about impact and metrics and understanding the customer, we are actually talking about surveillance data. We should have an open debate about what this means.
Today’s students and early career researchers and professionals will be critical to the future success of our scholarly societies and associations. How well are they being served at present and how can we ensure their support in future?
A short film showing the evolution of one of our more useful words.
Journal additions, suppressions, new metrics and an improved user interface are included in this year’s Journal Citation Report (JCR).
Offering researchers credit for performing peer review seems, on the surface, like a good idea. But implementing such a scheme raises some problematic questions.
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.
Submitting articles for publication is a nightmare–there’s a plethora of platforms and interfaces, and they all seem to be awful. Can anything be done?
A whirlwind tour of the fascinating architecture of the modern library.
Rick Anderson interviews Deni Auclair, VP and Lead Analyst for Outsell Inc., about the recently published report “Open Access 2015: Market Size, Share, Forecast, and Trends.”
It is time to reframe the gender diversity issue. Women are underrepresented in leadership and yet make better leaders. Robert Harington writes that it is up to all of us in leadership positions to tip the scales of diversity towards inclusion and balance.