Peer Review

This category contains 364 posts

Wellcome Money — Involvement with F1000 Opens Door on Sketchy Peer Review, COIs, and Spending Decisions

With a new partnership with F1000, Wellcome embraces sketchy peer review standards, deep conflicts of interest, and financial support of a private, commercial enterprise. Worse, the entire thing seems redundant, avoidable, and unnecessary. Continue reading

Peer Review Week 2016 #RecognizeReview

Peer Review Week is back! After a successful first year, planning for Peer Review Week 2016 is in full swing. This post will give you an outline of the week focusing on Recognition for Review. Continue reading

What If Academic and Scholarly Publishers Paid Research Authors?

It’s a question that has lurked around the edges of our campfire for a while — what if publishers paid authors of research papers? Quickly, it becomes clear why this is very unlikely to happen — for financial, ethical, and practical reasons. Continue reading

The Open Scholarship Initiative: Talking a Good Game, But Can We Deliver?

A look back at the recent Open Scholarship Initiative conference, from several Scholarly Kitchen “Chefs” who attended. Continue reading

Image Manipulation: Cleaning Up the Scholarly Record

After hundreds of manipulated images were detected across 40 scientific journals, the real work will be to correct the scientific record. Continue reading

Sensationalism or Legitimate Worries? Examining the Cottage Industry of Journal Criticism and Science Alarmism

We’re in a thicket of stories proclaiming “science is broken” and that stealing articles isn’t stealing because, publishers. This cottage industry of journal bashing and science trashing has reached a crescendo. What drives it? And what more important stories are being missed in the maelstrom? Continue reading

Three Things Scholarly Publishers Should Know About Researchers

We’ve looked recently at things publishers want researchers to understand better. Are there things researchers in turn want publishers to understand better? Charlie Rapple opens a discussion. Continue reading

The New(ish) Kids on the Block – Touring the Megajournals

A tour of four major “megajournals” and some of their neighbors finds a few common approaches and a few distinguishing features, but the entire category may need to be rethought given the lack of “mega” generally among the set. Continue reading

Ask The Chefs: What Is The Biggest Misconception People Have About Scholarly Publishing?

What is the biggest misconception people have about scholarly publishing? That’s what we asked the Chefs this month. Now we’re asking you. What did we miss? Continue reading

The Downside of Scale for Journal Publishers: Quality Control and Filtration

Scale can be achieved by broadly outsourcing the editorial process. Does this lead to a loss in quality control, and is this acceptable? Continue reading

Seven Things Every Researcher Should Know About Scholarly Publishing

After many and long conversations among colleagues within and beyond the Scholarly Kitchen
about what researchers need to know about scholarly publishing, Alice Meadows and Karin Wulf compiled a list of what we think to be the most urgent issues.
Continue reading

The Illicit Love Affair between Open Access and Traditional Publishing

At the recent PSP conference there was a panel on the cost of complying with the many new open access mandates from funding bodies. The panel explored the cost of compliance and how to reduce those costs. The current regulatory regime is complicated and administratively expensive, but the mandates will continue to be promulgated because the people calling for them are not the ones that have to implement them. Continue reading

SAGE, Publons and the Love-in Between Publishers and Start-ups

SAGE recently announced that it has taken a minority stake in peer review start-up Publons. Charlie Rapple asks why publishers are investing in workflow tools, and why start-ups are accepting publishers’ money. Continue reading

Guest Post: Kent Anderson UPDATED — 96 Things Publishers Do (2016 Edition)

Kent Anderson returns to update his essential list of just what it is that publishers do. Continue reading

Revisiting: The Problem(s) With Credit for Peer Review

Do we need more metrics, or can some questions be answered more easily? Continue reading

The Importance of Academic (History) Writing

Historians can and do play a vital role in the public humanities, but there are vital reasons not just why but how we write for one another, too. Continue reading

PNAS: Tighter Editorial Policy Improves NAS Papers

After years of tightening its submissions policy, papers contributed by NAS members start resembling direct submissions. Continue reading

What Price Progress: The Costs of an Effective Data Publishing Policy

The hidden costs of data availability policies. Continue reading

Ask The Chefs: How Does The Increased Use of Adjunct Faculty Affect Scholarly Publishing?

How does a differentiation between faculty on separate tracks for research or educational roles will drive change in the reward system? How might it impact scholarly publishing? Continue reading

Is Reviewer Fatigue a Real Thing?

Editors are quick to assume that reviewer fatigue is slowing them down; but one journal found that excessive invitations to review was not cited as a major reason why reviewers declined invitations. Continue reading

The Scholarly Kitchen on Twitter

Find Posts by Category

Find Posts by Date

July 2016
S M T W T F S
« Jun    
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  
SSP_LOGO
The mission of the Society for Scholarly Publishing (SSP) is "[t]o advance scholarly publishing and communication, and the professional development of its members through education, collaboration, and networking." SSP established The Scholarly Kitchen blog in February 2008 to keep SSP members and interested parties aware of new developments in publishing.
......................................
The Scholarly Kitchen is a moderated and independent blog. Opinions on The Scholarly Kitchen are those of the authors. They are not necessarily those held by the Society for Scholarly Publishing nor by their respective employers.
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 21,849 other followers