Researchers say journal article recommendations are useful. Do these publisher platform features influence user behavior? How might they increase discovery and serendipity in the researcher’s workflow? A series of studies provide new evidence of increased reader engagement.
The buzz around blockchain is mounting. But does it fit with scholarly publishing’s incentives and practices?
Love it or loathe, blockchain is making the headlines everywhere! But what exactly is it? Does it really have a role to play in scholarly communications? If so, what and how? In this interview, Joris van Rossum (Digital Science) and Martijn Roelandse (Springer Nature) answer these questions and more.
Why would a for-profit, VC funded publisher celebrate by committing itself to a full year’s worth of additional expenses with no additional revenue?
Overlooking the need for paid Editorial Office staff hobbles many attempts to reform peer review.
Silicon Valley’s advertising model has been exploited, and free information’s price is more apparent. Will we be saved by subscription model innovations?
Over the past decade, the Kitchen has flourished, with more great things to come as we celebrate this important milestone.
By incorporating post-publication validation badges into preprints, bioRxiv begins to transform itself from a preprint server into a publishing platform.
In this update, the focus shifts to the value journal publishers offer, and who benefits.
Robert Harington talks to Ed Pentz, Executive Director of Crossref, exploring the past, present and future of Crossref, a fabulous example of how for-profit and non-profit organizations alike may collaborate when needs must.
Solving the transfer problem has created a widespread perception that rejecting a manuscript–especially after considerable time and resources have been devoted to its review–is downright wasteful. If it’s publishable, why not publish it?
Would an AI-driven peer review system improve objectivity? Cathy O’Neil, author of Weapons of Math Destruction explains the biases and subjectivity inherent in algorithms.
Prediction is a strong word. Does anyone really know the future? Of course not, but it’s fun (and can be helpful) to speculate. Come add to the Chefs’ predictions for 2018.
2017 may have been a watershed year for the Internet and its future. What did we learn? And what factors may shape 2018?
Why is it so hard to build a good journal article submission system?