Journal suppression is an effective tool for reducing high rates of self-citation, even years after a title is reintroduced.
Revisiting Kent Anderson’s 2012 interview with the author of “How Economics Shape Science”.
Revisiting our review of Paula Stephan’s book after her keynote talk at the SSP Annual Meeting.
A review of top journals in 18 fields show they are on a variety of platforms, suggesting cognitive burden for users which may be driving them to aggregated options with unified user experiences.
This year’s SSP Annual Meeting was a record-breaker. Come see what the Chefs learned at the meeting and tell us what you learned, if you were there in person or virtually!
A growing number of scholarly communications tools and services are using artificial intelligence. Find out more about one such tool, Yewno, in this interview with their co-founder and Chief Business Development & Strategy Officer, Ruth Pickering.
Open access (OA) publishing seeks to eliminate paywalls for users. It has largely succeeded, but new diversions and distractions built into the commercial Internet may create new barriers that will be harder to deal with.
What happens when an experiment is correct, but it’s really hard to replicate? Are there research results that are accurate but not reproducible?
Although just a few years old, FORCE11 has already established itself as a major force in scholarly communications To coincide with its recently launched Scholarly Communications Institute – a summer school for researchers, librarians, publishers, university and research administration, funders, students, and post docs – Scholarly Kitchen interviewed its President, Cameron Neylon.
Algorithms behave in ways even their creators can’t understand, yet they dominate how we share and see information. Do we need a “Three Laws for Algorithms”?
Thoughts on BioMed Central and Digital Science’s report on what peer review might look like in 2030.
For years, we in libraries have been predicting the imminent demise of the manifestly-unsustainable Big Deal — and yet it has persisted. Now that may be changing.
Science’s historical progress can’t be assumed. It has to be reclaimed, re-established. That’s more difficult in a fragmented information space geared for extremism.
The “ebook revolution” in scholarly publishing has behaved more like an evolution. Are we reaching a key inflection point where users are central to our innovations?
Getting researcher buy-in to new tools and systems can be challenging – even when those tools are intended to help free them of administrative burden. A community approach, such as the publisher-led initiative to require ORCID iDs for authors, can be very effective.