Research integrity demands stronger safeguards in order to protect the scholarly record. But for editors, when new integrity measures are introduced, they do not replace existing tasks; they are added alongside them, compounding workloads and responsibilities.
Today’s guest post summarizes the discussion in the recent EASE / STM / webinar, exploring the digital carbon footprint of scholarly publishing.
This post explores author, reviewer, and publisher ethics and responsibilities related to the use of AI in coding and publishing research software.
How do we define, track, and measure trust in scholarly publishing?
The first 2023 issue of Learned Publishing reflects on how to make lasting, meaningful improvements to our industry’s diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA).
In today’s post, Alice Meadows talks to Laura Feetham of IOP Publishing about their work to improve peer review quality in the physical sciences through their ongoing peer review excellence program.
The separation of powers is as important in academic publishing as it is in government.
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?
At a time when more research articles are more readily available to more readers globally than ever before, it’s crucial we are confident that those papers meet the highest standards and, that on those occasions where they don’t, there is a sound system in place to revise or retract them. So what can we do to make the publishing process more sound?