Research Integrity in Scholarly Communications — SSP Pulse Check Report
Today, we take a dive into the results of SSP’s latest Pulse Check Survey, revealing how our community is grappling with research integrity and its interconnected challenges.
Today, we take a dive into the results of SSP’s latest Pulse Check Survey, revealing how our community is grappling with research integrity and its interconnected challenges.
Let’s continue our “Ask the Chefs” conversation about what they might do differently with their open access strategy if they knew then what they know now.
Today, we learn what’s in store for this year’s fall seminar from SSP.
In this AI era, establishing trust and validating article versions with persistent identifiers (PIDs) is more important than ever.
From 19th-century beef tea to paper mills and generative AI, the challenge is no longer detection alone; it is preventing bad claims from becoming embedded knowledge.
Today’s guest post asks: Do trust markers and other systematic fraud-prevention practices exclude unaffiliated authors from contributing to the scholarly record?
An interview with Natalie Ridgway about new guidelines from the Committee on Publication Ethics.
Research integrity demands stronger safeguards in order to protect the scholarly record. But for editors, when new integrity measures are introduced, they do not replace existing tasks; they are added alongside them, compounding workloads and responsibilities.
Today’s guest post presents outcomes of the WCRI’s (World Conferences on Research Integrity) Focus Track to address this gap in clarity and standardization of AI disclosure.
Today’s post asks us to acknowledge the role of AI in peer review and ensure practical guidance and policies that help scholars respond with consistency and confidence.
Today, we offer reflections on the SSP Annual Meeting from our 2026 Fellowship cohort.
Building robust citation and attribution into generative AI systems are foundational to usage, credit and trust. We need to expect more from AI.
We asked some of the attendees of the recent SSP Annual Meeting in Chula Vista, CA, to answer the question: “What are some takeaways from your experience at SSP 2026?”
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.
This month’s Pulse Check survey focuses on our community’s views on advocacy, industry priorities, and challenges of engaging with policymakers and the public.