Dr. Jie Xu from the Wuhan University of China offers a view of how Chinese researchers are reacting and are likely to alter their behavior in response to new policies governing research evaluation.
A reanalysis of TrendMD experimental data reveal details on its effectiveness, novelty, and bias.
TrendMD may drive traffic, saves, and citations, according to a new study by the founders and employees of TrendMD. Deeper analysis of their results reveal overstated results and a lack of context. Should these papers be considered sound science just another form of marketing?
As we sign off for 2019, a look back at the year in The Scholarly Kitchen.
How many articles from predatory journals are being cited in the legitimate (especially medical) literature? Some disturbing findings.
Scholarly publishing needs a scalable, easily adopted, and industry-wide approach to the problem of author manuscripts including citations to articles in fraudulent journals.
Experimentation is key in supporting open access monographs. We’ve done the research and now it’s time to build a better user experience.
Several of the foremost enterprises in open source recently joined forces with a group of universities that direct funding to support open source, to call for greater resources to be invested in support. This Invest in Open Infrastructure initiative, though nascent, may be the best hope to date of some kind of common collective action in support of open infrastructure. Today, we interview one of its leaders, Dan Whaley.
A brief review of studies linking social media and article-level performance.
Sharing and evaluating early stage research findings can be challenging, but that’s starting to change. Learn more in this guest post by Sami Benchekroun and Michelle Kuepper of Morressier
The editorial board for the Journal of Informetrics declared checkmate when they resigned over Elsevier’s open access and open citations policies. Raising both practical and moral questions of journal ownership, the editors of Learning Publishing ask: What can this power move tell us about editorial ownership in the age of open science?