Guest Post — Could AI Help Fix Peer Review, or Will it Only Make Things Worse?
Today’s post asserts that peer review, which is still of vital importance to science, is clearly failing in the current age — could AI save the day?
AI in Peer Review: Revisiting an 8-year-old Debate
In 2018 at SSP New Directions, Neil Blair Christensen and Angela Cochran participated in an Oxford debate on the use of AI in Peer Review. Today, they revisit their main points and reflect on where they think we are today and will likely be in another 8 years.
Guest Post — The Perils of Using Generative AI to Perform Research Tasks: Editors’ and Publishers’ Viewpoints
Today’s guest post offers a review of a panel of publishers and editors discussing the pros and cons of using Generative AI, along with ethical and policy implications.
Guest Post — Re-imagining Scholarly Integrity: The “Continuum of Consensus” Quality Control System
Today’s guest blogger proposes the “Continuum of Consensus” as a solution to shore up research integrity, peer review, and the public trust in scholarly research.
Guest Post — Diamond Open Access Needs Institutions, Not Heroes
Today’s guest blogger asks: What would it mean to support community-led publishing as infrastructure, rather than as a collection of heroic individual efforts?
From “AI helps me write” to “AI runs the workflow”: Eight Tech-trend Reports through a Publishing-and-learning Lens
A review of eight technology industry trend reports that offer a similar conclusion: AI is no longer a feature. It’s becoming infrastructure — and the unit of value is moving from “a better tool” to “a better system.”
Back to the (Article of the) Future: An interview with Sami Benchekroun and Rod Cookson
In this interview with Alice Meadows, Sami Benchekroun (Morressier/Molecular Connections) and Rod Cookson (The Royal Society) share their thoughts about how and why scholarly publishing needs to move away from being article-based.
The Year in Review: 2025 in The Scholarly Kitchen
Before we plunge into 2026, a look back at 2025, a difficult year for many in the scholarly community.
Guest Post: Academic Publishing Is Not Fit for the Future – If We Don’t Act Now, The Vital Role Research Plays in Society Is at Risk
Academic publishing ia reaching a breaking point. Unless we redesign it, we risk stalling the very progress we seek – with consequences impacting research, education and public trust in academia.
Reimagining Scholarly Publishing Workflow: A High-Level Map of What Changes Next
Rather than just bolting on AI to existing publication workflows,there is a real opportunity to rethink and redesign them for human–AI collaboration. Some thoughts on what that looks like in practice.
Guest Post — AI as Reader, Author, and Reviewer: What Stays Human?
Today’s guest blogger shares highlights from a recent panel at the New Directions Seminar that concluded AI is simultaneously the largest challenge and the largest opportunity.
Guest Post — A Systems Approach to Research Publishing: From Fragmentation to Cohesion
Today’s guest blogger sees scholarly publishing at a critical inflection point and research suffering from a flawed incentive structure. Can systems thinking offer innovative solutions?
Manuscript Submissions Are Up! That’s Good, Right?
Publishers have led themselves into a mess by focusing on rising submissions as a positive indicator of journal performance. The time has come to close the floodgates and require that authors demonstrate their commitment to quality science before we let them in the door.
Guest Post — Reporting from LIBER 2025: Policy Influence, Library Agency, and Researcher-First Open Access Moves
Today’s guest bloggers reflect on the the LIBER Annual Conference in Lausanne (2–4 July).
Three Years After the Launch of ChatGPT, Do We Know Where This Is Heading?
Nearly three years after ChatGPT’s debut, generative AI continues to reshape scholarly publishing. The sector has moved from experimentation toward integration, with advances in ethical writing tools, AI-driven discovery, summarization, and automated peer review. While workflows are becoming more efficient, the long-term impact on research creation and evaluation remains uncertain.