Today, nearly one in four adults serves as a caregiver. Because of this, work-life flexibility isn’t just a nicety it’s a game-changer, for individuals and organizations alike.
Since every possible method and model of scholarly communication is imperfect, a healthy scholarly ecosystem must be pluralistic, providing space for experimentation and for a diversity of methods, models, and philosophies to coexist.
The global scholarly publishing ecosystem has already transitioned — not to open access, but to a diverse hybrid system. So much the better.
Building on SSP’s spring results of the individual compensation and benefits study, Melanie Dolechek shares insights from the organizational survey — a slide of the survey data that provides useful benchmarks on policies and practices across publishing organizations.
Today’s guest blogger explains how Drexel University sees transformative agreements as one of the best ways to support researchers and the public dissemination of knowledge, while also benefiting the university through cost-saving measures.
In honor of International OA Week, The Scholarly Kitchen Chefs ponder the theme: Who owns our knowledge?
Event planners are faced with the delicate balance between constructing spaces for deeper connection with the impact we’re having on our planet. Here’s what I’ve learned about planning events that prioritize sustainability.
In the fast-moving world of AI research tools, there are many community-focused concerns that vendors should have strong opinions on and plans for, from privacy and security to sustainability and copyright. But the most misunderstood issue, in my view, is the one at the heart of it all — how AI will reshape the economics of academic research.
A scholarly communication ecosystem that relies on voluntary support rather than charging for access to content becomes radically less capable of keeping money in the system.
The MIT Press surveyed book authors on attitudes towards LLM training practices. In Part 2 of this 2 part post, we discuss recommendations for stakeholders to avoid unintended harms and preserve core scientific and academic values.
The MIT Press surveyed book authors on attitudes towards LLM training practices. In Part 1 of this 2 part post, we discuss the results: authors are not opposed to generative AI per se, but they are strongly opposed to unregulated, extractive practices and worry about the long-term impacts of unbridled generative AI development on the scholarly and scientific enterprise.
FAIR represents the best opportunity of the models under consideration to ensure that research information services receive appropriate recognition and sustainable funding
A recent survey of 66 learned societies (primarily in the UK) revealed a revenue crisis which threatens the very existence of community-driven publishing, and by extension learned societies themselves.
An AAAS survey reveals authors’ concerns and confusion regarding open licensing of their work.
Robert Harington talks to Matt Kissner, CEO of Wiley, in this series of perspectives from some of Publishing’s leaders across the non-profit and for-profit sectors of our industry.