Does Altering A Dataset Merit Retraction?
Self-archiving on personal sites is perfectly permitted under many journal data policies. But what happens when an author alters the underlying data?
Self-archiving on personal sites is perfectly permitted under many journal data policies. But what happens when an author alters the underlying data?
What is the Forensic Scientometrics Declaration, and how did it come about? An interview with Dr. Leslie McIntosh.
Before we plunge into 2025, a look back at 2024, a year of uncertainty in The Scholarly Kitchen.
At the start of every December, STM hosts their innovation and integrity days in London. This year, research integrity was the focus of both days, reflecting growing interest and concern in the publishing industry.
Without understanding the dimensions of ethics in scholarly communications, our attempts at improving the system through tools and training may not be effective and sustainable.
Robert Harington attempts to reveal inherent conflicts in our drive to be as open as possible, authors’ need to understand their rights, and a library’s mandate to provide their patrons with the enhanced discovery that comes with AI’s large language models (LLMs).
An interview with Ganna Kharlamova, who is working to changing the way scholarly communications and publishing are conducted in Ukraine.
As artificial intelligence begins to play an ever-bigger role in the scholarly publishing landscape, how might it help solve some of the biggest challenges facing publishers?
As preprints become an increasingly integral part of scholarly communication, can automated screening tools improve their reliability and preprint servers’ operational efficiency?
Publishers need institutions as partners in addressing research integrity issues. Transformative agreements provide an ideal framework for fostering these partnerships.
In today’s Peer Review Week post we hear perspectives on innovation and technology in peer review from a diverse group of users from different countries and disciplines.
AI-generated content has been discovered in prominent journals. Should peer reviewers be expected to find AI text in manuscripts? Where in the publication workflow should these checks be done?
In a world full of natural and man-made shocks and stresses, we need to be resilient against those affecting the academic publishing ecosystem.
Bibliometric databases are essential tools for research and publishing strategy. But the variability in how they parse publisher metadata and their constant evolution makes it difficult, if not impossible, to exactly reproduce any given piece of research.
It is essential to address the hidden costs of retraction and to discuss who needs to bear this cost.