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.
How Meaningful and Reliable Are Social Article Metrics?
New publishing initiatives link concepts like “importance” to social metrics like popularity and sharing. Is this logical? Can these metrics be easily gamed?
Where Trust Is Built and How It Can Be Destroyed — A Publisher’s Perspective
A write-up of a presentation at Charleston, here’s one way to parse trust in academic publishing.
Does Rejecting Papers Amount to More Than Just a Transaction Cost?
The expenses publishers incur rejecting papers and book proposals are about more than filtering.
Radiohead Contemplates Digital Realities — Parallels for STM Publishing
Radiohead’s bassist contemplates the band’s journey through digital distribution as they prepare to release another group of songs. Publishers can find parallels.
Liquid Journals or Lazy Journals — Can Technology Alone Make a Journal?
A “new” approach to making a journal smacks of old thinking, and is essentially inflammatory and naive.
Are Peer-Reviewers Overloaded? Or Are Their Incentives Misaligned?
Improving participation in peer-review may be a matter of finding the right combination of incentives.
The “Burden” of Peer Review
Do the benefits of peer review outweigh the work involved? How does post-publication review stack up in comparison?
Today’s UK Researchers: E-journals Dominate, Access Not an Issue, Skimming Increasing
A set of findings confirm rather than surprise, but apparently some publishers are still behaving as if they’ll be surprised.
Good God! Can’t a Journal Author Have Any Fun Anymore?
An article’s authors and a journal’s editor are surprised when a puff-piece backfires. Thanks for the pretentious seriousness, blogosphere.
The RIN Report on Researchers and Web 2.0: If You Build It . . . Well, You Know the Rest
The Research Information Network’s new report on researchers and Web 2.0 offers a similar set of results to previous studies: uptake is relatively low, and the trustworthiness and quality of online resources are suspect. The report offers contrary evidence to common myths about “digital natives” and some useful advice for anyone looking to build social media.
Post-Publication Review: Does It Add Anything New and Useful?
Post-publication review is spotty, unreliable, and may suffer from cronyism, several studies reveal.
Impact Factor Inflation: When an Increase is Actually a Decrease
Journals that fail to keep up with background Impact Factor inflation may actually be losing ground.
Cups, Buckets, Pools, and Puddles: When the Flood of Papers Won’t Abate, Which Do You Choose?
When most papers submitted ultimately get published, and in an age driven by pooled philosophies and practices, are we already participating in a “filter failure” of immense proportions?