Two videos offer tips on separating the actual research done in medical studies from the often over-hyped media coverage.
Two years after its initial entry into the marketplace, Cabell’s Blacklist has matured into a carefully crafted and highly useful directory of predatory and deceptive journals.
Invisible to most readers of scholarly content is the editing process. In this post, Angela Cochran and Karin Wulf explore the role and processes for journal editors from two very different disciplines– History and Civil Engineering.
How do you authenticate a piece of art when the artist is mysteriously anonymous?
How can not-for-profit organizations outcompete their commercial rivals? Revisiting Joe Esposito’s 2011 post that lays out a blueprint for success.
What happens when regulations around research funding pit the interests of the laboratory head against those of their students and postdocs?
The editorial board for the Journal of Informetrics declared checkmate when they resigned over Elsevier’s open access and open citations policies. Raising both practical and moral questions of journal ownership, the editors of Learning Publishing ask: What can this power move tell us about editorial ownership in the age of open science?
Famed detective Sherlock Holmes does his best to help his friend Dr. Watson figure out how best to comply with the requirements of Plan S.
In this article, Robert Harington implores Plan S leaders and funders to take researcher needs to heart.
Okay, 2019, it’s gotta be the end of manels (all male panels) and whanels (all white). Online projects provide resources that call attention to the problems of bias, and make locating women experts easy.
A public allegation of citation manipulation among 5 journals deserves a public inquiry.
Who has the most power to take choice away from authors?
The suppression of three economic history journals reveals more about Clarivate’s methods than citation manipulation.
Scholars are interested in discovering libraries and archives as institutional producers of knowledge, not only using them as providers of resources.
Kent Anderson looks at an innovative approach to peer review that has expanded, changed review approaches, and impressed authors.