From the Peer Review Congress, what’s changed and what’s about to change? John Sack conducts an interview with the Executive Director and Co-Director of the International Congress on Peer Review and Scientific Publication.
The value of the big deal has declined. Will libraries drive down its price — or help publishers prop up its value?
Where will FAIR end up? What will be its value to research data management stakeholders? To see into the future, Brian Lavoie of OCLC suggests we start by looking into the past in this guest post.
Today, the MIT Press is issuing a new research report, Mind the Gap: A Landscape Analysis of Open Source Publishing Tools and Platforms. It provides an inventory of some 52 ongoing open source publishing initiatives and a thoughtful analysis of the open source community in publishing — tracking its development without shying away from its struggles.
As community-owned and -led efforts to build scholarly communications infrastructure gain momentum, what can be done to help them achieve long term sustainability?
Users need training in the complexities of online search. A new book by Daniel Russell from MIT Press offers solid instruction in how to think about the search process.
How can an authentication system be granular and protect privacy? @TAC_NISO describes RA21 and attribute release for single sign on systems and how it supports privacy.
In a world of face-paced constant change, individual development and evolution is critical. What new skills have you developed in the past 5 years and why?
Heather Staines shares highlights of this year’s Library Publishing Coalition Forum, especially the focus on open platforms and tools.
Guest blogger Julie Zhu discusses publisher strategies and industry standards for tending to the “plumbing” of content discovery and access.
Judy Luther takes an in-depth look at Unizin, a consortial effort by universities to build open source digital learning systems.
A brief review of studies linking social media and article-level performance.
Despite the near consensus about the popularity (or lack thereof) of commenting on academic articles, there is surprisingly little publicly available data relating to commenting rates. To address this, a team of academics from the Universities of Sheffield and Loughborough have recently published research into article commenting on PLOS journals. Simon Wakeling, Stephen Pinfield and Peter Willett report here on their findings.
Two years after its initial entry into the marketplace, Cabell’s Blacklist has matured into a carefully crafted and highly useful directory of predatory and deceptive journals.
An awareness of how neurodiverse people in academia and scholarly publishing perceive the world can improve working relationships and help them achieve their potential.