Guest Post — All this AI Signal and Noise: What Deserves Action Now
Amidst the onslaught of industry and global changes, opportunities, and advancements, which signals deserve action now, which are context, and which are weather?
Amidst the onslaught of industry and global changes, opportunities, and advancements, which signals deserve action now, which are context, and which are weather?
Today, the co-chairs of the 2027 SSP Annual Meeting discuss the theme and the importance of gathering to discuss what, how, and why we publish.
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.
In today’s Mental Health Monday post, Ja’Nya Jenoch, a licensed mental health counselor, professor, author, and health researcher, takes us through the history of maternal mental health, unpacks terms such as postpartum depression and maternal separation anxiety, and explores the complex systems and pressures that shape the experiences of many mothers.
Today’s Peer Review Week post is a Kitchen Essentials interview with Daniela Saderi, Executive Director of PREreview.
Today’s guest post challenges our community to face tendencies toward groupthink and address the incentive structures that resist adaptation and innovation.
The US Department of Justice filed a Statement of Interest in the copyright infringement litigation between The New York Times and OpenAI and Microsoft, et. al., largely siding with the AI companies and strongly favoring the notion of LLM training as fair use. We asked the chefs for their thoughts.
Today, we learn what’s in store for this year’s fall seminar from SSP.
As AI research assistants learn our preferences, they may also become better at mirroring our assumptions. Avoiding that outcome will require more than a better prompt.
Dolly Parton touched so many people’s lives in so many ways. We reached out to the Chefs for their thoughts on her passing.
Some thoughts on the reader response the Scholarly Kitchen has seen regarding AI use by authors, a recent Nature News article on the efficacy of AI detection tools, and why it’s important to keep experimenting to figure out what’s ethically acceptable.
Today’s guest bloggers reflect on an SSP panel conversation about how scholarly publishing is not only built through shared work but also through shared understanding.
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?
The central risk of AI in scholarly publishing is therefore not hallucination but cognitive debt: the gradual erosion of the human capacities that give scholarship its originality, integrity, and meaning.