Here we examine the second phase of China’s Journal Excellence Action Plan, its implications, its funding framework, and what it means for Chinese scientific journals, researchers, and the broader international academic publishing community.
Christos Petrou presents evidence suggesting that growth in retractions has not been universal across regions and subject areas, and it is primarily driven by the industrial-scale activity of papermills (rather than the activity of individual researchers) and the growth of research from China.
The nationwide audit of retracted articles in China underscores the interconnectedness of stakeholders within the research ecosystem and emphasizes the importance of aligning incentives and priorities to foster a culture of integrity and accountability. Can similar efforts be applied globally to cultivate a culture of accountability and transparency?
Mary Miskin offers an interview with Prof. Dr. Liying Yang, Director of the Scientometrics and Research Assessment Unit at the National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences, who manages the Early Warning List and the CAS Journal Ranking.
Nicko Goncharoff presents an overview of the STM/CUJS China Symposium and offers key takeaways, including China’s increasing concern over APCs and Gold OA costs, divergent views on research integrity, and better routes to cooperation.
An architectural tour of the great libraries of China turns up a spectacular place to read a book on the beach.
An interview with Mark Robertson about the CAST/STM report on open access and China.
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?
The new US policy on access to research publications suggests an acceleration in the shift toward open access. Christos Petrou examines what that would look like in different fields and for different journals.
Thoughts on the new Chinese policy on research evaluation from three Chinese publishers.
The recent attempt by China to censor scholarship points to a growing set of challenges in information dissemination. Blaming the publisher obscures these issues.
An interactive visualization of article publication data from the 2016 NSF Science & Engineering Report suggest discrepancies in the cultures of science around the world.
Internet security seems to be crumbling before our eyes, and our media and leaders are not immune and lack a crucial understanding of how vulnerable a totally digital world can be. The answer may lie with analog technologies.
The Academic Publishing in Europe (APE) meeting in Europe is 10 years old, but feels as fresh and frisky as some of the meetings in the US used to. This report touches on some of the most interesting threads of two days’ worth of interesting presentations and conversations.
The emerging spectre of cyberwar and cyberterror has real implications for academic and scientific publishers, who already deal with the side effects and may become targets in the future.