Ethics In Scholarly Publishing Is More Than Following Guidelines
Without understanding the dimensions of ethics in scholarly communications, our attempts at improving the system through tools and training may not be effective and sustainable.
Without understanding the dimensions of ethics in scholarly communications, our attempts at improving the system through tools and training may not be effective and sustainable.
An interview with Wiley SVP Josh Jarrett about their work improving publishing processes with AI and licensing content for AI applications.
Publishers need institutions as partners in addressing research integrity issues. Transformative agreements provide an ideal framework for fostering these partnerships.
Revisiting Rick Anderson’s 2022 post which asks, are libraries “neutral”? That question is way too simplistic to serve as anything other than a political football.
What are the new directions in scholarly publishing? Check out the unique “reverse roundtable” discussions at SSP’s New Directions seminar!
Do publishers really understand what tools researchers are using and how they are using them? Can we do more to create better policies based on real use cases and not hypothetical conjecture about what AI might do in the future?
New NISO guidance on clear consistent display of retraction information will reduce inadvertent reuse of erroneous research.
Citing chatbots as information sources offer little in terms of promoting smart use of generative AI and could also be damaging.
Three Oxford administrators want to lower the cost of mandatory open access by shifting the responsibility for enforcement to funding agencies. But that doesn’t lower costs at all; it only shifts them. To truly lower costs, stop trying to make open access mandatory.
In this post we reflect on the current threats to trust in scholarly journal publishing, and the implications for organizations like Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) that seek to uphold that trust.
How will the American Sunlight Project make it more costly for bad actors to spread disinformation — and what does this mean for scholarly publishing?
An update on progress from the STM Research Integrity Hub.
As high profile cases about image integrity problems in scientific papers become more frequent, the community must consider how to overcome the issues with the manual image review process and the benefits of AI in rapidly detecting, and potentially preventing, these issues.
Christos Petrou presents evidence suggesting that growth in retractions has not been universal across regions and subject areas, and it is primarily driven by the industrial-scale activity of papermills (rather than the activity of individual researchers) and the growth of research from China.
Promoting research integrity is not just identifying bad behavior: problem articles can also be detected by the absence of ‘honest’ signals of integrity.