A recap of a recent SSP webinar on artificial intelligence (AI) and scholarly publishing. How can this set of technologies help or harm scholarly publishing, and what are some current trends? What are the risks of AI, and what should we look out for?
Another “mixed bag” post from us — Is it time to leave Twitter? How can we incentivize journals and authors to take up open science practices? What is “involution” and is DEIA the solution?
After becoming a Scholarly Kitchen Chef back in July 2019, I have never stopped being amazed by the numerous dynamic issues and developments that scholarly publishing is dealing with. As a biologist by training, ‘diversity’ is the word that comes to mind.
Roger Schonfeld argues that openness and politicization together have enabled public trust in science to erode. And science is insufficiently trustworthy. The scholarly communication sector must not ignore this situation.
Katie Einhorn, Steph Pollock, and Nick Paolini discuss APA’s efforts to collect demographic information during manuscript submission. In this interview, they share what they did, why, how, and what this means for other publishing organizations.
In today’s post, Angela Cochran is revisiting the topic of balancing reviewer needs and author expectations. Recent data from one flagship journal showed significant overlap in the reviewer pool within top journals in the field, emphasizing the need to double-down on efforts to diversify.
Today we revisit Geraldine Cochran’s 2018 post, which offers a chance to understand the differences between the words “diversity”, “inclusion”, and “equity”, and how that understanding can make our efforts toward progress more effective.