Summing up the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Forum discussion on Emerging AI Dilemmas in Scholarly Publishing, which explored the many challenges AI presents for the scholarly community.
An interview with Wiley SVP Josh Jarrett about their work improving publishing processes with AI and licensing content for AI applications.
New NISO guidance on clear consistent display of retraction information will reduce inadvertent reuse of erroneous research.
Fraud is undermining the integrity of the scholarly record. United2Act is striking back at paper mills.
Should the authors’ institution make decisions regarding authorship disputes on a paper?
How do we define, track, and measure trust in scholarly publishing?
FORCE11 and COPE release recommendations on data publishing ethics for researchers, publishers, and editors.
We round out Peer Review Week with a guest post by Erin Landis, Meghan McDevitt, and Jason Roberts of Origin Editorial reporting on the 2022 Peer Review Congress.
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.
Editors are in a position of power to coerce authors to cite their journal and personal papers. Can algorithms help detect misconduct when authors and journal staff are unwilling to speak out?
New changes at COPE seem to move the organization further away from standards and closer to suggested behavior. At the same time, a new policy on member expulsions was announced. Is it clear exactly what members are agreeing to?
Fifteen years after the term was coined, we still don’t have a single agreed-upon definition of Open Access (OA). What are the implications of this diversity of views within the OA movement, and how much does it really matter?
It’s time to abandon the library-as-victim narrative and write a new story.
After one year, most COPE funds remain unspent. Is it time to revise the policy?
Is the creation of an author publication fund really an experiment? Or a piece of fiscal advocacy dressed up in scientific clothes?