Peer Review Archives - The Scholarly Kitchen

Guest Post: Preprints Serve the Anti-science Agenda – This Is Why We Need Peer Review

Science is built on a foundation of rigor and credibility. Preprints are adding to the crumbling of that foundation, which is already under attack by anti-science political agendas.

Peer Review Has Lost Its Human Face. So, What’s Next?

I think human-dependent peer review has lost its human element, thus its relevance, so what we can do to install a new system by abandoning the present one?

Research Integrity, Image Manipulation, Content Provenance and the C2PA

Image integrity has been a growing issue in scholarly publishing. Todd Carpenter suggests we addreess the problem of image integrity at scale.

Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion in Pre-Award Funding Processes: Actions, Not Words

In today’s post, Alice Meadows shares an update on a project to improve DEI in pre-award funding applications.

Creating the Publishing Platforms that Next-Gen Professionals Expect

Will the next generation of professions be impressed with the content platforms and workflow tools we currently have? Angela Cochran imagines a world where we meet the challenge of modernized systems.

Molecular Connections Buys Morressier

Molecular Connections has purchased Morressier. Analysis from Roger C. Schonfeld.

Does Altering A Dataset Merit Retraction?

Self-archiving on personal sites is perfectly permitted under many journal data policies. But what happens when an author alters the underlying data?

Guest Post: An Editor’s Perspective on “My Very Last Issue.”

BMJ’s Medical Humanities Editor-in-Chief Brandy Schillace reflects on changes in publishing that are making important work harder to do.

The Genesis and Purpose of the Forensic Scientometrics Declaration: An Interview with Dr. Leslie McIntosh

What is the Forensic Scientometrics Declaration, and how did it come about? An interview with Dr. Leslie McIntosh.

Access to Science & Scholarship: An Interview with Amy Brand of MIT Press

On September 20, 2024, MIT Press hosted a workshop, Access to Science & Scholarship: An Evidence Base to Support the Future of Open Research Policy. I interviewed Amy Brand to discuss the goals and outcomes of the workshop.

Disruption As an End in Itself: eLife’s Suspension and DORA’s Response

DORA’s reaction to Clarivate’s decision to no longer fully index eLife (and, therefore, not to give it a Journal Impact Factor) seems inconsistent with both its and eLife’s public positions, and based on the mistaken belief that “disruption” is an absolute good in itself.

The Scholarly Kitchen

Archives: Peer Review

Peer Review Has Lost Its Human Face. So, What’s Next?

Research Integrity, Image Manipulation, Content Provenance and the C2PA

Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion in Pre-Award Funding Processes: Actions, Not Words

Creating the Publishing Platforms that Next-Gen Professionals Expect

Molecular Connections Buys Morressier

Does Altering A Dataset Merit Retraction?

Guest Post: An Editor’s Perspective on “My Very Last Issue.”

Access to Science & Scholarship: An Interview with Amy Brand of MIT Press

First-Hand Publishing Experiences: Researcher Panel at SSP’s New Directions Seminar

Silverchair Buys ScholarOne from Clarivate

Guest Post — Upholding the Integrity of Open Science

Annual Meeting Early Registration is Open—Download the Preliminary Program now!

SSP Sponsors 2nd Student Journal Symposium for Literary and Research Publications

SSP Originals Auction is Back!