Does Rejecting Papers Amount to More Than Just a Transaction Cost?
The expenses publishers incur rejecting papers and book proposals are about more than filtering.
Ouroboros and Peer Review: New Proposals Continue to Chase Their Own Tails
Can social reputation metrics provide a meaningful incentive for researcher participation in peer-review and online commentary?
Liquid Journals or Lazy Journals — Can Technology Alone Make a Journal?
A “new” approach to making a journal smacks of old thinking, and is essentially inflammatory and naive.
Are Peer-Reviewers Overloaded? Or Are Their Incentives Misaligned?
Improving participation in peer-review may be a matter of finding the right combination of incentives.
CrossDress: A New Fashion-Forward Service Where Social Media Meets Glamor
CrossRef announces a new system in conjunction with New York’s Fashion Week.
Privatizing Peer Review — The PubCred Proposal
When authors are unwilling to peer review and incentives are not enough, is it time to privatize the system?
When Solutions Take On a Life of Their Own
What happens when a proposed solution for a problem becomes an end unto itself? Is peer review really more important than research itself?
Post-publication Review: Is the Dialog of Science Really a Monologue?
It has never been easier to post a comment to a scientific article. Just don’t expect an adequate reply from the author — or one at all — according to a new study.
Let the Adaptations Begin!
The infrastructure for change is in place and largely working. What might that mean for publishing and academic cultures? (The first of a four-part series.)
The “Burden” of Peer Review
Do the benefits of peer review outweigh the work involved? How does post-publication review stack up in comparison?
Rectifying Asymmetries — Experts Are Battered From All Sides, But Are We Any Smarter?
Is the Web making experts more susceptible to challenge? Is this a good thing for society as a whole? Or is it creating a confusion demagogues can exploit?
Ending the Supplemental Data “Arms Race”
Supplemental data undermine scientific integrity by undermining the peer review process.
Left-handed Cancer, Box Springs, Scientific American, Branding, and Credibility
When brands, credibility, and trust all stumble, what is an increasingly weary public supposed to think?
The RIN Report on Researchers and Web 2.0: If You Build It . . . Well, You Know the Rest
The Research Information Network’s new report on researchers and Web 2.0 offers a similar set of results to previous studies: uptake is relatively low, and the trustworthiness and quality of online resources are suspect. The report offers contrary evidence to common myths about “digital natives” and some useful advice for anyone looking to build social media.
The Pepsi Syndrome: Did ScienceBlogs Sell Out, or Was This Just Business As Usual?
The science blogosphere erupted in a furor this week, when Seed Media’s ScienceBlogs announced a new blog–Food Frontiers, a paid, sponsored blog about nutrition written by employees of PepsiCo. Multiple bloggers either suspended their blogs or quit ScienceBlogs altogether over their concerns that adding this blog undermined the credibility of the platform and their credibility as individual writers. Eventually, ScienceBlogs caved under the pressure and removed Pepsi’s blog. Did ScienceBlogs sell out to commercial interests, or was this just a continuation of what they’ve always done?