The SSP Annual Meeting keynote speaker contemplates how new tools and new ways of presenting content might lead to a world of mixed algorithmic and human editing and curation.
PeerJ has the potential to create a divergent path to OA publishing, but its business model isn’t clear. As a service company, there are intangibles it needs to get right in the meantime.
Time for your input for a session at the upcoming SSP Annual Meeting — pose your questions now!
Registering clinical trials after enrollment has commenced may lead to the perception that medical researchers are peeking.
A new open access publishing service, Peerj, has been started by Peter Binfield, formerly the publisher of PLoS ONE. This augurs a price war among author-pays OA services.
While BioMed Central’s responses are a mixed bag, a new finding surfaces. And this one might just beat all.
The UK Government Science Minister articulates a plan for open access and open data for UK research. The implications aren’t clear, but the intentions are.
The growing perception that science is built on sand demands not only some new incentives, but also an understanding that science is not always easy — or possible — to replicate.
An interview about open access, funding of science, publishable works, profit motives, and other topics of interest, with one of the more thoughtful advocates of OA publishing, Cameron Neylon.
This fascinating TED talk will resonate on many levels with people who read this blog — study design, arrogance, vindication, creativity, inspiration, complexity, evolution, and authority are all dealt with. The topic is “the God complex” — the tendency for […]
A PLoS ONE article recently went viral, hitting the front page of Reddit and garnering an amazing amount of reader interest. This was great news for the journal and the paper’s authors, but raises questions for the notion of post-publication […]
When we talk about peer-review, we often gloss over the important role of editorial review, which precedes external peer-review — in some cases, eliminating a majority of papers while raising an important type of quality.
Science has always been politicized, but its political involvement and use is different these days. What is happening? And what can we do about it?
UKSG Coverage – The Future of Scholarly Journals: slow evolution, rapid transformation – or redundancy? @CameronNeylon and @Michael_Mabe debate at #UKSGlive
There’s much more to making “post-publication peer-review” work, much less a valid form of peer-review. Rebranding comments and letters isn’t sufficient. Maybe it’s time to recognize over-reach.