AI in science should not be viewed merely as a productivity tool layered onto existing workflows. It represents a structural shift in how knowledge moves through society, and therefore in how scientific authority is established and maintained.
Today’s post calls for collective action to address the researcher identity verification gap in scholarly communications and champions STM’s Researcher identity group.
Guest blogger Jonny Coates looks at Richard Poynder’s post-mortem on the Open Access movement, and uses it as a framework to ask questions about the future of preprints.
Wendy Queen interviews Nadim Sadek. Nadim is a creative strategist and founder of Shimmr AI, who argues that AI can strengthen human creativity rather than replace it.
In this post, Robert attempts to embrace a gloomy optimism as he muses on the state of publishing at scholarly societies.
Today’s post is an urgent call to push back against global trends in academic censorship and threats to free speech in scholarly communications.
Today’s guest post offers a review of a panel of publishers and editors discussing the pros and cons of using Generative AI, along with ethical and policy implications.
Today’s guest post asks readers to reckon with the idea that knowledge reflects power, and the global knowledge economy excludes the Global South.
How are two competing neuroscience journals faring since the editorial board of one departed to create the other?
Today’s guest bloggers assert that the future of the scholarly publishing depends on mastering science communication with the same rigor that global consumer brands apply to marketing.
In this interview with Alice Meadows, Sami Benchekroun (Morressier/Molecular Connections) and Rod Cookson (The Royal Society) share their thoughts about how and why scholarly publishing needs to move away from being article-based.
Current AI disclosure guidelines are failing and driving AI use underground rather than making it transparent. In this follow-up post, I turn to the more challenging question: what publishers should do about it.
Is open scholarship an honest signal of researcher integrity? We present preliminary evidence that data and code sharing, preprinting, and other open behaviors are indeed less common in papermill articles.
Only a negligible percentage of authors seem to actually be disclosing their AI use. Here’s why I think that’s the case.
Today’s guest post features an interview with William Gunn discussing how AI will (or won’t!) change the future of reference management tools.