Like all OA funding models, subscribe-to-open solves some problems while creating others. Some of the downsides are pretty fundamental.
Global initiatives in open are decentralized and disconnected, lacking researcher input and buy-in. An “opens solutions” approach can both embrace and leverage that diversity, ensuring that it all contributes to the greater whole.
Adam Savage of “Mythbusters” addresses how they approached ideas that had “no basis in science”, and how that phrase is essentially meaningless.
The DocMaps Project offers a machine-readable, interoperable and extensible framework for capturing valuable context about the processes used to create research products such as journal articles.
Journalists are increasingly flagging unsupported claims and blatant falsehoods–it’s time for preprint platforms to do the same.
Mark Thomas discusses lessons learned in moving ALPSP’s face-to-face workshops into an online offerings.
In support of Open Access Week, we asked our community how we can achieve equitable participation in Open Research. Part 1 today, Part 2 tomorrow. Come share your views!
An interview with Elizabeth Wu and Danika Khong about their new tool to help reduce bias and increase fit for research careers.
Cell Press announces an experiment with parallel peer review.
In support of #PeerRevWk20 theme #TrustInPeerReview, we asked the Chefs how trust in peer review could be improved. See what the said and add your thoughts!
Results of this partnership signal we should expect future expansion of content syndication.
How can collective action models to support open access, like Subscribe to Open, be applied to academic publishing? An interview with Raym Crow.
A look back at 2014’s discussion of measuring the immeasurable.
Revisiting a 2018 post — Overlooking the need for paid Editorial Office staff hobbles many attempts to reform peer review.
As the big deal falls, we are witnessing a shift in academic library purchasing power closer to the point of need.