From Hub to Hustle: The Scattered Social Landscape in Scholarly Comms
How has the social media landscape in scholarly communications changed, according to data from the recent Pulse Check, past community surveys, and checked real, live marketers?
How has the social media landscape in scholarly communications changed, according to data from the recent Pulse Check, past community surveys, and checked real, live marketers?
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.
While it’s true that AI may be viewed as “legitimate,” it’s far from universally loved. Understanding that distinction tells us something important about how the technology may ultimately be adopted — and governed — within academia.
SSP’s Advocacy Task Force Co-chairs encourage members to participate in this month’s Pulse Check Survey on our collective advocacy activities.
A look at the data from the second year of the SSP Compensation and Benefits Benchmarking Study.
Today’s guest blogger asks: How much do we read today? How do reading habits vary across generations? What should libraries and publishers do to encourage reading?
The Scholarly Kitchen’s 2025 Readership Survey reflects feedback from our community that will shape the future direction of our blog.
Today’s guest bloggers advocate for marketing strategy using localization, which brings cultural fluency, awareness, and authenticity to our communication with partners around the world.
Today’s guest bloggers share results of an exploratory survey of funding research services, offering a snapshot of a library community in transition.
Today’s guest bloggers share insights into the fragmented, tiring, and uncertain digital landscape for academics, and evidence that a shift is underway — with implications for scholarly communication that may be far-reaching.
Building on SSP’s spring results of the individual compensation and benefits study, Melanie Dolechek shares insights from the organizational survey — a slide of the survey data that provides useful benchmarks on policies and practices across publishing organizations.
In today’s post, Teodoro (Teo) Pulvirenti and Marianne Calilhanna join Randy Townsend to unpack the disturbing topic of suicide among the LGBTQ+ community.
AI has opened a new chapter in the saga of science and peer review. Today, guest author Prof. Nihar B. Shah explains how, if guided with integrity, AI can open galaxies of possibilities.
The future of peer review isn’t about choosing between humans and AI, or between speed and quality, but about combining the strengths of both to enable speed with quality, to ensure quality, ethics, and trust in the scholarly record.
NISO’s Open Discovery Initiative (ODI) survey reflects the positive and negative expectations of generative AI in web-scale discovery tools.