AI in science should not be viewed merely as a productivity tool layered onto existing workflows. It represents a structural shift in how knowledge moves through society, and therefore in how scientific authority is established and maintained.
Today, we share the results of a global community poll that produced the theme for Peer Review Week 2026 (14–18 September): “Peer Review Capacity: Volume, Speed and Quality.”
There is more and more skepticism toward the role of publishers, a steady commoditization of publishing services, and growing fragmentation across the research ecosystem. If that is the case, the question is no longer what publishers do, but how that value is understood and extended.
Guest blogger Jonny Coates looks at Richard Poynder’s post-mortem on the Open Access movement, and uses it as a framework to ask questions about the future of preprints.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.”
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.
Before we plunge into 2026, a look back at 2025, a difficult year for many in the scholarly community.
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.
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.
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.