Gaming Google Scholar Citations, Made Simple and Easy
A new paper demonstrates how easy it is to game Google Scholar citations, and how the system resists correction.
A new paper demonstrates how easy it is to game Google Scholar citations, and how the system resists correction.
Funders and governments are exerting their influence in scientific publishing through monetary and financial threats, and are willing to slow science in order to accomplish OA goals.
In a story of the modern age of fraud, spoofers find their way into peer-review rosters, reviewing their own papers or those of their friends/competitors.
Creating a centralized database for disclosing conflicts of interest (COI) is an easy sell. Deciding who is responsible and accountable for its funding and support is a much harder problem.
Funders — corporate, governmental, and philanthropic — have different priorities, yet they are now reaching into scientific publishing, wearing OA as a glove that fits. This post explores the problems this is creating and might create if allowed to perpetuate.
In this first part of a three-part series, the intrusion of governments into scientific publishing is contemplated — its causes, current state, and possible effects.
Using your brains to think of an idea and your skills to implement it? That’s the old-fashioned way.
Putting metrics and altmetrics into perspective can help us separate secondary signals from primary signals, and may lead to a greater appreciation of alternatives to metrics, or alt2metrics.
An attempt to entice citations from authors leads to a memorable story for the holidays.
What happens when NFL analysts embrace a film classic? They probably mean no harm, and are not at all short on charm.
The recently departed WSJ Health Blog taught us all lessons — and this blogger the lesson of standing up for what is clearly a better way of doing things.
While the recording industry generally gets a bad rap for managing the transition to online distribution, there is one niche that has flipped the model and uses old distribution techniques to sell music across multiple formats. That niche is indie rock and there are some lessons for publishers.
One of the layers of impropriety regarding PubMed Central’s handling of eLife is its mismanagement of conflicts of interest.
When you think through all the effects stealing traffic has on online publishing businesses, PubMed Central’s competitive presence looms large — whether you sell subscriptions, ads, or APCs.
More articles are published by PubMed Central at the behest of eLife. It seems taxpayer-funded publishing is just fine for this new group.