A new report from Simba surveys the current scientific and technical publishing markets. These segments are essentially flat. Incumbents are seeking growth elsewhere. Interestingly, open access has not had much of an impact on the revenue of traditional publications.
A new declaration to improve research assessment practices shoots wide of the mark and reveals some misunderstandings on behalf of many of those involved.
With the creation of Rubriq, co-founders Shashi Mudunuri and Keith Collier have broken new ground. Rubriq is an attempt to provide peer-review independent from journals.
Editors have learned how to exploit a simple loophole in the calculation of the Impact Factor. Is it time to close that loophole?
The herd of social sharing sites in the sciences is being culled. And one — Mendeley — may be assimilated by Elsevier.
Making sense of non-events (citation, circulation, and publication) requires context and a tolerance for uncertainty.
A new paper demonstrates how easy it is to game Google Scholar citations, and how the system resists correction.
A new study suggests a weakening of the relationship between a journal’s impact factor and the articles published therein. An unorthodox analysis and unwillingness to share data for validation purposes raises serious questions about how seriously to take this study.
Fifty-one journals are suspended from the Journal Citation Report for “anomalous citation patterns.” Whether or not you agree with the impact factor, sanctions help maintain the integrity of the scientific publishing enterprise for everyone.
Google’s new “Scholar Metrics” promise to make the h-index viable for journals on a large scale. But problems exist in their approach, some of them easily handled, some not.
Cheap, effective, and nearly undetectable — editors devise citation cartels to drive up their journal’s impact factor.
How well do citations predict Nobels? With an ever-expanding roster of eligible candidates, the going is getting tougher.
Citations can be counted, but what do they mean? InCites wants to help us interpret them. But are citations data? Or social signals?
When information was scarce, it needed copyright protection. When it’s abundant and a service, is it relevant anymore? Really?
The notion of a persistent, unique, portable author identifier sounds reasonable, but there may be a showstopper or two hidden in the mix.