Ask the Co-Chairs: A Look at the 2023 SSP Annual Meeting
Stephanie Lovegrove Hansen sat down with the Co-Chairs of the SSP’s Annual Meeting Program Committee to learn more about the event and what we can look forward to.
Stephanie Lovegrove Hansen sat down with the Co-Chairs of the SSP’s Annual Meeting Program Committee to learn more about the event and what we can look forward to.
Data quality and record keeping are going to grow in importance as a result of AI applications.
When a journal’s entire editorial board is replaced, is it still the same journal? And if that board starts another journal on the same topic, is it a new one or a continuation of the old one? Discuss.
Looking at five ‘lines’ that the publishing industry has broadly agreed upon, but that now we are finding ourselves crossing.
Wiley’s Jay Flynn discusses the impact that paper mills had on Hindawi’s publishing program and how all stakeholders must collaborate to address behaviors that undermine research integrity.
Christos Petrou takes a look at the Guest Editor model for publishing and its recent impact on Hindawi and MDPI, as Clarivate has delisted some of their journals.
Is the OA movement painting itself into a corner with concerns about new OA rules and regulations?
Danny Kingsley suggests that research integrity begins with the training researchers receive at university. Achieving Open Research and increasing reproducibility requires systematic research training that focuses specifically on research practice.
A recap of a recent SSP webinar on artificial intelligence (AI) and scholarly publishing. How can this set of technologies help or harm scholarly publishing, and what are some current trends? What are the risks of AI, and what should we look out for?
After making up a false claim about a nonexistent study done by the AAAS, the AI software admitted that it made a mistake and then apologized.
The STM Integrity Hub will include software to detect image manipulation and duplication. It is important that the effectiveness of the software be evaluated in a transparent process.
Editors at The BMJ are lousy at predicting the citation performance of research papers. Or are they?
Observations on reproducibility and research integrity from London STM Week
What if even by saying “fake science” you inadvertently participate in a scam? What if this phrase legitimizes fraud, lies, and deceit? Let’s call it what it is – dupery.
Karin Wulf and Rick Anderson reflect on the OSTP’s response to their interview questions, and on some implications of those responses and of the memo itself.