Open Access Memberships: Are Libraries Paying Too Much?
Columbia University drops BioMed Central membership after it discovers it was paying way too much.
Columbia University drops BioMed Central membership after it discovers it was paying way too much.
What will $0.99 per article do to the access debate?
Is open access publishing prone to vanity press behavior? A recent study provides questionable results.
Under threat of litigation, Emerald reverses claim of plagiarism to “communication error.” Offending author allowed to correct and republish work.
An author-pays open access model for humanities and social sciences journals is not a sustainable option, a detailed analysis of association publishers suggests.
Moving beyond citations, publisher paints broader picture of quality with palette of performance indicators.
Providing incentives to reviewers may be key to improving the peer review process.
Access to the scientific literature by small and medium-sized businesses is good, although it could be a lot easier, according to a new report.
Is the creation of an author publication fund really an experiment? Or a piece of fiscal advocacy dressed up in scientific clothes?
A 2.0 Publishing talk delivers little more than anecdotes, buzzwords, and a narrative that conflates technological, biological, and cultural evolution. Does “Content Nation” really deliver a new view of publishing? Or just a business model borrowed from Web 2.0?
Pimm’s, the summer drink for the cultured literati.
Unethical republication has created a unique opportunity to study the effect of journals on article citations.
The Pubget search engine delivers search results along with PDFs. Should we view this new service as a time-saver for readers or as a threat to publishers?
Manipulating online rating systems may be more common than you think. Journals promoting highly-downloaded and rated articles should take note.
When it comes to downloads and citations, position in the arXiv matters, a new study finds.