Journal articles with ChatGPT authored text are being found. How common is this in the literature? And how, or better yet, when, is this problematic text slipping through to publication?
A panel attending the 2023 AUPresses Meeting hosted a conversation about optimizing books metadata and measuring its impact on search experiences in the mainstream web.
Revisiting a post from 2017: Several services aim to gather all publications comprehensively. Who has all the content?
Although Google Scholar claims to not use DOI metadata in its search index, a recent study finds that books with DOIs are generally more discoverable than those without DOIs.
Several services attempt to gather up “all” of the content across publishers. This post provides an overview and taxonomy.
While all publishers like to have a strong brand, some brands are so prestigious that they actually serve to paralyze the managements responsible for them, making it impossible to introduce innovations and to develop the business. Vast bureaucracies arrive whose purpose is not to develop the business but to protect the vaunted brand. This is a management problem, not a marketing one, but it can stymie a publisher from pursuing a progressive agenda.
Revisiting Joe Esposito’s classic post on how the governance of not-for-profit publishing entities plays a large role in those entities’ success or failure.
HighWire’s John Sack looks at the changes that search engine indexing has driven for discovery of research publications. Part 2 of a two part series covering Anurag Acharya’s recent ALPSP keynote address.
HighWire’s John Sack looks at the changes that search engine indexing has driven for discovery of research publications. Part 1 of a two part series covering Anurag Acharya’s recent ALPSP keynote address.
Establishing new citation benchmarks and an international board of academics, Elsevier is poised to take on Thomson Reuters for dominance in the citation metrics market.
A look at Facebook’s Instant Article initiative and what it means for discovery and for publishers.
Scholars are citing an increasingly aging collection of scholarship. Does this reflect the growing ease with accessing the literature, or a structural shift in the way science is funded–and the way scientists are rewarded?
Several researchers recently “stumbled across” an article indicating the reasonable likelihood that Liberia would be faced with cases of Ebola. Public health officials had not acted on this known likelihood. The question is why.
Scholars are citing proportionally more older material, a new Google paper reports. Digital publishing and delivery, and better search engines can only explain part of the trend. Something much bigger is taking place.
The scientific literature is expanding while the number of publication slots in elite journals has shrunk. Is it any wonder why many more highly-cited articles are found in non-elite journals?