In anticipation of Peer Review Week, we’ve asked the Chefs their opinions on if and how peer review might change. Come tell us yours!
PubMed is found to contain predatory journals and publishers, likely reflecting a long-term and broader problem, which only adds to the confusion about what exactly PubMed represents at this point.
Today sees the launch of Metadata 2020, a new initiative to improve research metadata by increasing our understanding of its value, and engaging with the community to ensure it’s fit for purpose. Led by Crossref and supported by individuals and organizations across all of scholarly communications, participation is open to all. Find out more, including how to get involved, in today’s post.
The recent attempt by China to censor scholarship points to a growing set of challenges in information dissemination. Blaming the publisher obscures these issues.
Is access to the research paper really the same thing as access to the research results themselves? What about patents on publicly funded research? Revisiting a 2013 post to re-examine these questions.
Conflicts of interest and corporate-funded research have expanded, with journals increasingly used by mega-corporations to advance their initiatives. What will this mean for scholarly publishing?
Robert Harington reviews a delightful new book that reminds you of how delightful our publishing world can be. Printer’s Error: Irreverent Stories From Publishing History by Rebecca Romney and J. P. Romney.
Editorial excellence? Agility? Data analytics? Customer focus? UI/UX? What are the most critical core competencies for publishers today? We asked the Chefs and we’d like your answer too!
A recent book took aim at accelerating administrative demands and the internalized expectation of measurable productivity that have eroded the quality of academic life and work. Is there a corollary for scholarly publishing?
The theme of this year’s Peer Review Week is transparency in peer review. Learn what the four speakers at the September 12 PRW panel session on this topic think this means and why it’s important.
The change of administrations in the United States was only 6 months ago but seems like much longer. Many things have changed in Washington with regard to science policy and the new administration’s orientation to science. Jeffrey Mervis, senior correspondent at Science magazine, talks with podcast host Michael Clarke about what has changed, what has not changed, and the implications of it all for science.
The UK Scholarly Communications License repeats many of the stumbles of the original monolithic and mandatory OA policies. We urge its proponents to slow down and learn from them instead.
The rise of mobile is cementing business model expectations and driving new monopolies, but the ethics, incentives, and consequences of these models need to be considered.
A look at the many personality conflicts behind the establishment of Cell Theory.
Scholarly publishers have long thought in categories such as journals, monographs, textbooks, and reference. Reference as a category is splitting in two.