For social science and humanities researchers in many parts of the world there are significant barriers to conducting and sharing research, in some cases more so than for science and medicine. In this guest post, Dr. Naveen Minai provides a perspective as a gender studies researcher in Pakistan.
A collection of Scholarly Kitchen posts about Predatory Publishing.
We can be certain that, if Elsevier asserts its obvious platform advantages, there is no data firewall that can protect other publishers from Elsevier’s strategic advance.
Thanks to a major new international research study, it’s no longer possible to pretend that predatory journals are not a serious problem that needs serious attention. The question is: do we have the will to confront it?
Elsevier’s acquisition of Aries Systems sends shockwaves through the industry, but is it really that surprising?
Funders are increasingly demanding measurements of “real world” impact from researchers. Does this steer us toward the same traps we’re already in from the ways we already do research assessment?
Sharing research with the public is critical, and there are multiple platforms and approaches to this kind of outreach. We tried a local book group for sharing both scholarship and the scholarly process.
Recent coordinated investigatory journalism articles, along with separate regulatory actions, are squeezing predatory publishers. But are the root causes being addressed?
An author found that the relevant journals were unwilling to publish an article of historical research that found evidence for a surprising and somewhat controversial proposition about the founding of the University of Utah. So what did she decide to do with her article? Something rather unusual, it turns out.
A history of the rise of coercive media suggests that raising barriers to entry may be a remedy. Could a business model shift do most of the work for us?
We have seen a surge in scientifically minded search engines and browser extensions that aim to supercharge content discovery — have they cracked the code in mainstream search and retrieval of scholarly literature?
Editors are in a position of power to coerce authors to cite their journal and personal papers. Can algorithms help detect misconduct when authors and journal staff are unwilling to speak out?
Google’s journal about artificial intelligence (AI) coming from editors and authors associated with Google and Google Brain raises questions about conflicts, vanity publishing, and Google as a media company.
Libraries and legacy publishers are in an unholy embrace. They need not love each other to feel they should stick together.
Why do authors continue to cite preprints years after they’ve been formally published?