Sherlock Holmes and the Case of the Baffling Funder Mandate
Famed detective Sherlock Holmes does his best to help his friend Dr. Watson figure out how best to comply with the requirements of Plan S.
Why Society and Not-For-Profit Journals Are Worth Preserving: Better Economic and Continuing Value for the Community
Plan S seems to favor larger, commercial publishers over smaller, independent, not-for-profit publishers. Is this an acceptable sacrifice or are societies, and not-for-profit publishing, worth preserving?
Guest Post: Transforming the Research Paper into a Functional Tool
Code Ocean’s Pierre Montagano talks about expanding our concept of what the research article can offer.
Guest Post: Help TRANSPOSE Bring Journal Policies into the Open
TRANSPOSE is a new crowdsourced resource that seeks to reduce the uncertainty of journal policies by providing a clear, structured summary in one place.
Credit for Peer Review: What is it Worth?
We know that peer review is important and that the hard work of reviewers should be recognized. Yet we still don’t really know how that recognition should work.
The Rise of Peer Review: Melinda Baldwin on the History of Refereeing at Scientific Journals and Funding Bodies
In this interview Robert Harington asks Melinda Baldwin to talk about her recent article in Isis, entitled “Scientific Autonomy, Public Accountability, and the Rise of “Peer Review” in the Cold War United States”, and to provide some more personal views on peer review topics of the moment.
Does Adopting a Strict Data Sharing Policy Affect Submissions?
Editors commonly fear that data policies will hurt submissions, but data from 12 evolution and ecology journals say otherwise.
Plan T: Scrap APCs and Fund Open Access with Submission Fees
Plan S proposes to take a hammer to how we fund peer review and publication. The focus is currently on APCs, but submission fees are overall cheaper for authors, particularly at highly selective journals, and thus warrant serious consideration.
Peer Review in a Baker’s Dozen
A Baker’s Dozen TSK posts that address issues central to diversity, the theme of Peer Review Week 2018. We hope these will get your reading, thinking and commenting!
Eight Ways to Tackle Diversity and Inclusion in Peer Review
We continue our Peer Review Week celebrations with a roundup of articles about bias, diversity, and inclusion in peer review, by Alice Meadows, including eight lessons we can all learn from them
Guest Post: What a new Publons Report on Peer Review Says About Diversity, and More
The Publons Global State of Peer Review Report reveals significant patterns in reviews and reviewing, with implications for global science.
Guest Post: Transparency – “This is What We Do, and This is What We Expect”
We continue our Peer Review Week celebrations with a guest post by Donald Samulack (Editage) and Jason Roberts (Origin Editorial), who call for a collective approach to developing definitive guidance on transparency in peer review for journals, authors, and reviewers.
Clear, Blue Sky: The Environment for Diversity in Peer Review
To kick off Peer Review Week 2018, Alice Meadows and Karin Wulf — guest editors for this week — share their vision of the environmental requirements for a diverse and inclusive peer review ecosystem.
Ask The Chefs: How Would You Ensure Diversity In Peer Review?
In advance of Peer Review week, what are your ideas for ensuring diversity in peer review? Come see what the Chefs had to say and add your ideas to the conversation!
Guest Post: The Time for Open and Interoperable Annotation is Now
Annotation is increasingly being recognized as a valuable tool in scholarly communications, enabling increased engagement and collaboration and better metrics, and helping improve the quality of scholarly outputs. In this guest post, Heather Staines (Director of Business Development – Hypothes.is) and Alexander Naydenov (Head of Marketing and Co-Founder – Paperhive) tell us why!