With all the disruption and upheaval in digital scholarly communications, how do today’s researchers decide which articles and publications they can trust to read, cite, and write for? A recent study finds that, somewhat surprisingly, peer review and other traditional tools remain as popular as ever with most groups, though social media is increasingly popular with some.
We continue our Peer Review Week celebrations with a guest post by Donald Samulack (Editage) and Jason Roberts (Origin Editorial), who call for a collective approach to developing definitive guidance on transparency in peer review for journals, authors, and reviewers.
A public allegation of citation manipulation among 5 journals deserves a public inquiry.
Proposing a model for thinking about the interactions of rigor, cogency, accessibility, significance, openness, and impact in scholarly quality.
Publishing as we know it is being redefined to include other forms of content that are part of the scholar’s workflow.
A recent opinion paper by Richard Poynder @rickypo offers analysis and prognostication with regard to the current state and future prospects of #openaccess and the open access movement.
Another publisher sues a librarian for opinions expressed on a blog. This time, the publisher is demanding $1 billion in damages and $10,000 for having to write the threatening letter in the first place.
A new report for the Center of Economic Development suffers from a strong bias in its authorship. But beyond that, its implicit complaints, if addressed completely, would lead to a trainwreck in the world of scholarly communication. Is nobody thinking these things through?
Fake News is making headlines as questions about how dubious stories may have influenced the US election. This post explores the damage done to reputable news organizations and what scholarly publishers could learn from the whole thing.
As we’ve absorbed and adopted the information economy assumptions peddled by Silicon Valley, social isolation has increased, the definition of “fact” has become slippery, and the scientific record has become more superficial, less reliable, and more transitory. In fact, confirmation bias seems to have become our main operating principle. Maybe a change in economic incentives and greater skepticism across the board could help — all driven by more humans at the controls.
The DocMaps Project offers a machine-readable, interoperable and extensible framework for capturing valuable context about the processes used to create research products such as journal articles.
Part 2 of this series looking at open access developments in Canada examines the changing processes and infrastructure needs for open science.
Morressier’s Sami Benchekroun advocates for a mindset shift from resisting change to embracing adaptation in order to drive a new, more efficient infrastructure for scholarly communications.
Last week, the news broke about a new service called DOAI that is designed to support open access. It is not a publishing model or a repository but rather a type of infrastructure. When a user inputs a DOI, DOAI connects […]
How do you know which technologies, tools, or best practices to incorporate into your organization? What if you had money to invest? Where would you place your bets? This month, we asked the Chefs that question. Come see what they said.