The Manuscript Submission Mess: Brief Notes from a Grumpy Author
Submitting articles for publication is a nightmare–there’s a plethora of platforms and interfaces, and they all seem to be awful. Can anything be done?
Submitting articles for publication is a nightmare–there’s a plethora of platforms and interfaces, and they all seem to be awful. Can anything be done?
Revisiting Rick Anderson’s 2013 post on what the options for the academy to take control of scholarly publishing, and whether any of those options seems feasible.
Those who argue that “predatory” behavior is not only a problem among author-pays OA publishers have a good point. But this raises another question: is the term “predatory” itself really useful in the context of scholarly communication?
When sexist comments make it into a technical review of a research article, journal editors and publishers are wise to take a moment and think about processes for finding, responding to, and eradicating this behavior.
What do we mean by ethnographic research? In essence we are talking about a rich, multi-factorial descriptive approach. While quantitative research uses pre-existing categories in its analysis, qualitative research is open to new ways of categorizing data. We take a look at how we can use this technique to delve into the subtleties of online user behavior – a must for publishers and societies involved in new product development
The Oxford English Dictionary’s overarching definition of the transitive verb “publish” is “to make public.” An early use, dating to 1382 is “to prepare and issue copies of (a book, newspaper, piece of music, etc.).” This is probably how most […]
Revisiting Kent Anderson’s post based on his FOIA request documents show that PubMed Central spends most of its money tagging author manuscripts, and that its stricter rules for NIH authors may double its costs.
What’s wrong with peer review and article submission processes? What can publishers, authors, and reviewers do to improve the status quo?
As we consider the future of scholarly publishing generally and of open access in particular, we need to keep in mind the deep differences between the humanities and the applied sciences when it comes to both the production and the consumption of scholarship–and the implications of those differences for new dissemination models.
Even open access advocates should support the commercialization of materials that are OA, as such commercialization can lead to enhanced discovery of scientific materials.
Boundless Textbooks used to offer free alternatives to popular and expensive college texts, using information available on the open Web. Then came the inevitable lawsuit, and an out-of-court settlement. What does the Boundless program look like now?
A recent non-controversy once again shows how much confusion exists around what exactly Creative Commons licenses actually mean.
Author Neil Gaiman pays tribute to the late, great Douglas Adams, and in his lecture, explains why books endure.
Guest Chef Bryn Geffert (Librarian of the College at Amherst College) tries to envision a world in which publishers can spend less time and money wrestling with copyright issues and scholars can more effectively share their work.
In an increasingly open world, should more subscription journals be converted to OA? And if so, why, how, and when?