Journal editors are more likely to reject papers when they experience trouble recruiting reviewers, reports a new study.
Revisiting Kent Anderson’s 2014 post on the importance of editors–how much of what we see as a failure of “peer review” is really a failure of editorial oversight?
This year, Thomson Reuters suspended six business journals for engaging in a citation cartel. Should the authors be held responsible for the malfeasance of their editors? We propose a new solution to punishing the community for the poor decisions of the few.
An alien landing in the scholarly and scientific publishing world today, reading all the opinions about how to make things more efficient and effective, might be forgiven for thinking there are only authors, readers, librarians, and reviewers. After all, those […]
Changes are afoot in the Kitchen, as leadership roles switch and we position ourselves for future success.
While the access debates have dominated, another debate has been emerging, one that perhaps has greater significance in the long run.
Can peer review systems be run less expensively? Sure, if you eliminate major levels and elements of peer review.
An analysis of publishing costs continues the theme of accountability and transparency, but perhaps focuses too much on the containers of information rather than how and why the containers are filled in the first place.