Rebecca Bryant (OCLC) explains why cross-campus social interoperability is needed to adequately support today’s researchers.
What if, instead of enacting a caricature of Silicon Valley, Stanford recognized the future and threw its arms around Stanford University Press? That would be the smart move.
In yesterday’s “Ask the Community (and Chefs)” post, librarians and people involved in various ways in journal publishing shared their thoughts about how to increase equity in open research. Today’s responses provide researcher perspectives and reflections on the wider enabling landscape for open access and open research.
Perhaps the academy has not taken control of scholarly publishing because it doesn’t want to.
In celebration of International Day of Women and Girls in Science, INASP conducted six interviews with inspirational women in academia from Africa and Asia. This post looks at some of the common themes and advice for supporting women and girls in research.
What should publishers know about researchers and their work? Alice Meadows and Karin Wulf follow up a post earlier this year about “Seven Things Every Researcher Should Know about Scholarly Publishing.”
When entities like Sci-Hub invite you to share your network credentials in order to help create free access to licensed scholarly publications, they’re asking for more than access to research. What they’re asking for may also give them access to your email account, your course management program, your tax documents, and more. Here are some things to think about before you decide to share that network user ID and password.
We’ve looked recently at things publishers want researchers to understand better. Are there things researchers in turn want publishers to understand better? Charlie Rapple opens a discussion.
After many and long conversations among colleagues within and beyond the Scholarly Kitchen
about what researchers need to know about scholarly publishing, Alice Meadows and Karin Wulf compiled a list of what we think to be the most urgent issues.
It was a little while back now that a controversial blogger attacked one or more of the authors of the Scholarly Kitchen for being former academics, questioning whether such people should be working in publishing. In today’s post, Phill Jones argues that such rhetoric contributes to a stigma that is damaging to the health of academia.
Historians can and do play a vital role in the public humanities, but there are vital reasons not just why but how we write for one another, too.
The broad online availability of theses and dissertations creates difficult tensions between the individual rights of authors, the rights of educational institutions, and the responsibilities that both have to global scholarship and the collective good. How can we resolve those tensions?
What do we mean by ethnographic research? In essence we are talking about a rich, multi-factorial descriptive approach. While quantitative research uses pre-existing categories in its analysis, qualitative research is open to new ways of categorizing data. We take a look at how we can use this technique to delve into the subtleties of online user behavior – a must for publishers and societies involved in new product development
Publication rewards productive scientists but has the unintended consequences of isolating scholars, reducing knowledge transfer and steering scientists away from engaging in policy and the press.
If openness is an ideological tenant of science, why are scientists so secretive?