In support of #PeerRevWk20 theme #TrustInPeerReview, we asked the Chefs how trust in peer review could be improved. See what the said and add your thoughts!
The FAIR principles answer the ‘How’ question for sharing research data, but we also need consensus on the ‘What’ question.
We revisit our analysis of how adopting a strict data policy affects journal submissions and find that the effects depend a lot on Impact Factor trends
Revisiting a 2018 post — Overlooking the need for paid Editorial Office staff hobbles many attempts to reform peer review.
So much change has happened in the last few months. What changes do you think will “stick” in scholarly publishing?
From binge watching, binge listening, reconnecting with neighbors and old friends, Zoom happy hours or Zoom family game nights, to cooking, exercising, and gardening, we’re all figuring out how to get through our days. What’s your strategy? Part 1 today, Part 2 tomorrow.
Giving authors a choice between submission fees and APCs has numerous benefits
Michael Eisen’s bold visions for eLife emerge on Twitter. We consider two of his proposed initiatives.
An awareness of how neurodiverse people in academia and scholarly publishing perceive the world can improve working relationships and help them achieve their potential.
Publishers and research funders both want open data, but active collaboration on policy is a rarity. The people behind a new (collaborative) data policy at the Belmont Forum share their experiences.