PubReader — Obscuring Journal Branding for the Sake of Repository Branding
A new way to view journal content in PubMed Central casts journal branding aside for a uniform PMC approach.
Post-Publication Peer-Review Already Exists, Already Has Incentives, and Is Already Robust
A recent exhortation to support post-publication peer-review with awards shines a light on the holes in both ideas.
Retractions Retraction — Did We "Overinterpret" or Did PLoS Editors "Overwrite"?
A flash mob of concern causes PLoS to reconsider a new policy on retractions.
Are University Block Grants the Right Way to Fund Open Access Mandates?
While block grants may be a preferred way to disperse money to fund public access mandates, their actual use may cause problems for researchers and universities.
Bury Your Writing — Why Do Academic Book Chapters Fail to Generate Citations?
Books and book chapters have a competitive disadvantage in citations, but it’s not accessibility that makes the difference — there are more reasons, and more changes needed.
Driving Innovation: Finding the Balance Between Fair Reward and Profiteering
Vitriol may have obscured important points in a post last week. The growing business strategy of our era is to drive the cost of everyone else’s product to zero in order to make more money from your own product. This imbalance stifles innovation and creation.
Editorial Rejection — Increasingly Important, Yet Often Overlooked or Dismissed
When we talk about peer-review, we often gloss over the important role of editorial review, which precedes external peer-review — in some cases, eliminating a majority of papers while raising an important type of quality.
The Problems With Calling Comments "Post-Publication Peer-Review"
There’s much more to making “post-publication peer-review” work, much less a valid form of peer-review. Rebranding comments and letters isn’t sufficient. Maybe it’s time to recognize over-reach.
The Stubborn Persistence of the Subscription Model
The clear benefits of the subscription model make it enticing even for those who supposedly abhor it. And while it’s right to try to make it as efficient as possible, it will likely be with us for a long time to come.
Is PLoS ONE Slowing Down?
Claims of speed can be used to carve out a competitive edge, especially for journals serving authors. PLoS ONE entered the market claiming fast publication times, but data show that PLoS ONE is slowing down, with times more than doubling over the past few years. Is PLoS ONE losing its speed advantage?
Separating The Threads: What Is the Link Between Access and Profitability?
The last few weeks of lively debate about OA in the Scholarly Kitchen have been informative, but have also involved a variety of mixed messages from all sides. There are assumptions being made that aren’t necessarily true, and arguments joined together that may in reality be at cross purposes.
PLoS' 2010 Progress Update — Pondering the Implications of a Watershed Year
PLoS turns its first surplus. What will this mean for an organization accustomed to acting like the rebel?
OA Rhetoric, Economics, and the Definition of "Research"
Rhetoric can’t hide financial realities. Is trading research for access a good use of funds?
Is Something Fishy Going On? Citations Suggest Correction Comes Slowly, If It Comes At All
Rebuttals are cited less, don’t change citation patterns for original papers, and generally fall flat. And you thought science was self-correcting?
Gaming the System: Do Promises of Citation Advantage Go Too Far?
Promises of more citations if authors pay are problematic in more ways than one.