Today’s post shares the results of an initiative designed to answer the question: what would it actually take to build a publishing model fit for the research ecosystem we have now, rather than the one we inherited?
Today, we feature a friendly debate on the question: which parts of the research lifecycle should be more automated, and which require more of a human touch — and why?
Research disciplines require institutions that create cohesion, uphold standards, and provide continuity over time. Scholarly societies are uniquely positioned to serve that role credibly and durably.
ScholarOne saw a submission surge in the first quarter of 2026 — evidence that AI is increasing the strain on peer review’s social contract with researchers.
Today’s guest post asserts that trust won’t be restored by “better messaging” alone, but via better incentives, more disciplined public communication, and really listening to the people who have walked away from us.
Today’s Mental Health Awareness Monday reflects on the need for validation in publishing careers, and how we might reduce unnecessary pressure on performance while preserving rigor.
Today’s guest post sounds an alarm about the use of AI in research and warns that no amount of computational efficiency can compensate for the loss of our capacity for human thought.
Today’s guest post advocates for investing in the development of early-career professionals to foster a healthy pipeline of emerging talent in scholarly publishing.
Today’s guest bloggers call publishers to lean into, rather than away from, their liability for science integrity and rigor.
AI in science should not be viewed merely as a productivity tool layered onto existing workflows. It represents a structural shift in how knowledge moves through society, and therefore in how scientific authority is established and maintained.
Today’s post calls for collective action to address the researcher identity verification gap in scholarly communications and champions STM’s Researcher identity group.
Today, we share the results of a global community poll that produced the theme for Peer Review Week 2026 (14–18 September): “Peer Review Capacity: Volume, Speed and Quality.”
Today we welcome a new Chef in the Kitchen, Ashutosh Ghildiyal.
Guest blogger Jonny Coates looks at Richard Poynder’s post-mortem on the Open Access movement, and uses it as a framework to ask questions about the future of preprints.
Today, co-chairs for SSP’s 48th Annual Meeting Planning Committee discuss what they’re most excited to deliver in this year’s program.