The Problem with Significance (a Cartoon)
I knew there was something they weren’t telling me!
I knew there was something they weren’t telling me!
Promises of more citations if authors pay are problematic in more ways than one.
Blogging still gets no respect. Is that because we’re more hidebound about our communication advances than the 16th century was?
Rather than relying on journal prestige and bibliometric indicators, universities should consider paying experts to conduct institutional peer review, report recommends.
The new Google Ebooks have made a mess of many popular classics in the public domain.
While it seems that availability drives down the quality of information goods, some exceptions make it clear this is not an unavoidable fate. Can scientific publishing beat the trend?
Alien life? Or just the will to publish, and some accomplices? While those in the field know the pecking order, those outside still get fooled.
How did “scholarly communication” become equated with open access advocacy? Is its misuse ultimately self-defeating?
A report by the AAUP outlines the business models available to university presses and makes a case for ongoing subsidies by parent institutions.
While sophisticated arguments about how the Internet is changing our brains continue, a look back at the history of communications systems shows we’re really arguing about something more base.
Does cascading peer-review increase inappropriate submissions?
Apple’s apparent abuse of its platform dominance may signal a basic incompatibility between providers and platforms.
With more and more science being tested and communicated outside traditional outlets, we may face a moment when faith in the existing system breaks down.
Scottie Pippen was a Beatle? Scholars a thousand years from now might just find evidence to suggest as much.
The outer ring of citation remains a point of vulnerability for quality proxies, as does reducing complex things to simple lists or numbers. When will we learn?