How many articles from predatory journals are being cited in the legitimate (especially medical) literature? Some disturbing findings.
Given the reality of fraudulent publishers and their deceptive practices, will institutions consider more strongly guiding author choice of publishing venue in order to protect institutional reputation?
As community-owned and -led efforts to build scholarly communications infrastructure gain momentum, what can be done to help them achieve long term sustainability?
So does Sci-Hub lead libraries to cancel journals, or doesn’t it? Maybe the answer isn’t a simple yes or no.
Two years after its initial entry into the marketplace, Cabell’s Blacklist has matured into a carefully crafted and highly useful directory of predatory and deceptive journals.
Transcript of a debate held at the 2019 Researcher to Reader Conference, on the resolution “Sci-Hub Does More Good Than Harm to Scholarly Communication.”
Guest author Rob Schlesinger encourages a rethink of the common requirement that graduate students publish their dissertations.
Mimi Calter, Deputy University Librarian for Stanford, offers a useful framework for libraries as they consider patron privacy.
A review of Academic Freedom the latest book in Oxford University Press’s series Engaging Philosophy.
Think science has issues with image manipulation? Wait till you see these advertising tricks used to make food look appetizing.
Famed detective Sherlock Holmes does his best to help his friend Dr. Watson figure out how best to comply with the requirements of Plan S.
What the public wants is better science, not open science. Plan S has put those two forces in conflict, and it is driving everybody crazy.
The separation of powers is as important in academic publishing as it is in government.
A public allegation of citation manipulation among 5 journals deserves a public inquiry.
Who has the most power to take choice away from authors?