Guest Post – Mental Health Awareness: What is Racial Battle Fatigue?
As we strive for a more equitable and inclusive future, how can we foster the well-being and potential of every individual, regardless of their ethnic or racial background?
As we strive for a more equitable and inclusive future, how can we foster the well-being and potential of every individual, regardless of their ethnic or racial background?
Three global society publishers respond to cOAlition S’s recent “Towards responsible publishing, a proposal from cOAlition S”.
Should the authors’ institution make decisions regarding authorship disputes on a paper?
Balancing the anxiety and the excitement over the use of Large Language Models (LLMs) in scholarly publishing.
Mary Miskin offers an interview with Prof. Dr. Liying Yang, Director of the Scientometrics and Research Assessment Unit at the National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences, who manages the Early Warning List and the CAS Journal Ranking.
Academia has developed an amazing tree of knowledge which is arguably the most important data for Large Language Models to be trained on. Where does the scholarly communication community fit in?
Noted journalist and scholarly communication observer Richard Poynder explains why he has given up on the open access movement.
A selection of questions and answers from Copyright Clearance Center’s response to the United States Copyright Office “Artificial Intelligence and Copyright” request for comment.
We asked the Chefs to weigh in with their thoughts on the new “Towards Responsible Publishing” manifesto from cOAlition S.
Separately, both open research and AI are considered disrupters, causes of disorder in the normal continuance of scholarly publishing. But approaching them in a synchronized way can offer more productivity gains and efficiencies than taking them on individually.
Accountability is at the center of leadership. We must hold people, policies and structures to account and if we are struggling with tackling the hard questions, are we really doing the work?
A mixed bag post from us — can you separate out the significance of research results from their validity? What will the collapse of the Humanities mean for scholarly publishing writ large? And a new draft set of recommended practices for communicating retractions, removals, and expressions of concern.
The COVID pandemic brought changes in what was acceptable to working life. Should we give up those benefits for the sake of returning to the office? How does each individual person’s experience differ, and how can we create conditions that allow all to thrive?
Robert Harington provides a template for scholarly societies wondering how to grapple with the overwhelming and omnipresent prospect of an AI future.
Human-dependent peer review is inequitable, suffers from injustice, and is potentially unsustainable. Here’s why we should replace it (eventually) with AI-based peer review.