Send us a link
A group of leading publishers is announcing a major new service to plug leakage, improve discovery and access, fight piracy, compete with ResearchGate, and position their platform for the OA ecosystem.
A recent opinion paper by Richard Poynder offers analysis and prognostication with regard to the current state and future prospects of the open access movement.
The publisher is committed to financial sustainability. How it achieves it is an open question.
Geowalling open content is proposed yet again. As a thought experiment, it is explored what Plan S principles would be compromised by this tactic.
Former scientist, turned publisher, turned research program director, Milka Kostic is uniquely placed to look at publishing from a researcher and a publisher perspective. In this interview, she shares her thoughts on both.
How many articles from predatory journals are being cited in the legitimate (especially medical) literature? Some disturbing findings.
It's Open Access week so this month we asked the chefs: What's next for OA? What lies beyond the APC as a funding model? Let us know your thoughts!
A discussion of the findings of a research study into the recent growth of preprint servers and exploration of how publishers might respond.
In a crowded and confusing landscape for research data preservation and sharing, two fundamentally competing visions are emerging. Which will win?
Sharing research data is increasingly becoming a real business. Today, we provide an overview this landscape and highlight several recent announcements that may indicate future strategic prospects.
Given the reality of fraudulent publishers and their deceptive practices, will institutions consider more strongly guiding author choice of publishing venue in order to protect institutional reputation?
Continuing our celebration of Peer Review Week 2019, today Alice Meadows interviews Tracey Brown, OBE, Director of Sense about Science, which has been involved in Peer Review Week from the start.
Alice Meadows and Karin Wulf kick off the fifth annual Peer Review Week with their thoughts on defining quality in peer review principles and practices.
An interview with Jason Lorgan, executive director of campus stores at @UCDavis, about the university's innovative new textbook-affordability program.
Could scholarly publishers' skills and capacity be re-positioned to serve researchers at earlier stages in the research process, 'upstream' of publication? A survey of the communications needs of almost 10,000 researchers.
In this guest post, Gisela Fosado and Cathy Rimer-Surles of Duke UP share highlights and a video from their panel session on equity at the 2019 AUPresses Annual Meeting, plus helpful recommendations to help us achieve equity in scholarly communications.
Proposing a model for thinking about the interactions of rigor, cogency, accessibility, significance, openness, and impact in scholarly quality.
A new research report provides an inventory of some 52 ongoing open source publishing initiatives and a thoughtful analysis of the open source community in publishing.
Authors want their papers published quickly while also expecting high-quality reviews. Reviewers want reasonable deadlines. These two groups come from the same communities so why the disconnect?
EMBO's Bernd Pulverer looks at the revised Plan S Implementation Guidelines.
So does Sci-Hub lead libraries to cancel journals, or doesn't it? Maybe the answer isn't a simple yes or no.
A path forward for open access in the humanities and social sciences.
Here's a 12 point guide to blockchain. Written for non-technically minded scholarly publishing folk.
The fifth annual Peer Review Week will take place from September 16-20, 2019. This post reflects on its history and achievements.
Will authors exercise their market power to put downward pressure on article processing charges?
Plan S has injected a much-needed sense of urgency to the debate about transformation to full and immediate open access, but what are we missing in our focus on the minutiae of compliance?
A brief review of studies linking social media and article-level performance.
Two years after its initial entry into the marketplace, Cabell's Blacklist has matured into a carefully crafted and highly useful directory of predatory and deceptive journals.
There’s a new publishing trend in town, says Mario Biagioli: Faking co-authors’ names. Biagioli, distinguished professor of law and science and technology studies and director of the Center for Innovation Studies at the University of California, Davis, writes that it’s “the emergence of a new form of plagiarism that reflects the new metrics-based economy of scholarly publishing.” We asked him a few questions about what he’s found, and why authors might do this.
Transcript of a debate held at the 2019 Researcher to Reader Conference, on the resolution 'Sci-Hub Does More Good Than Harm to Scholarly Communication.'
