Send us a link
There appears to be no realistic path forward that achieves Europe's 2020 open access targets without resulting in substantial revenue reductions for existing publishers. Will Europe miss its OA target? Or will publishers miss their revenue targets?
The Free Journal Network was established earlier this year in order to nurture and promote journals that are free to both authors and readers and run according to the Fair Open Access Principles.
One estimate puts the number of papers in questionable journals at 400'000.
"Their profit margins are bigger than oil and gas. Most people don’t know this,” explains Alyssa Arbuckle, Associate Director of a digital humanities lab at the University of Victoria.
Average spending has increased by 19 per cent in four years, Freedom of Information requests reveal.
Google's journal about artificial intelligence (AI) coming from editors and authors associated with Google and Google Brain raises questions about conflicts, vanity publishing, and Google as a media company.
Publishing exclusively in English can cause the deterioration of a culture’s local knowledge, brain drain, and hinder the emergence of important research. There are scholarly journals from the Global South who won’t flip to open access because they know they will be immediately labelled as predatory. Fixing these problems will require reconsidering how we talk about predatory publishers, no longer recommending blacklists, and using databases beyond Scopus and Web of Science.
As of May 2018, CORE has aggregated over 131 million article metadata records, 93 million abstracts, 11 million hosted and validated full texts and over 78 million direct links to research papers hosted on other websites.
Preprints are one of the fastest growing types of content in Crossref. The growth may well be approximately 30% for the past 2 years (compared to article growth of 2-3% for the same period).
Most researchers agree that drafting papers and interpreting results deserve recognition — but opinions don’t always match authorship guidelines.
Academics share machine-learning research freely. Taxpayers should not have to pay twice to read our findings.
The assumption that the publication of an article in a high-impact factor, indexed journal somehow adds value to international science is a collective illusion - one that is unfortunately shared by funding agencies, institutions and researchers. This illusion - which serves as an excuse to delegate the evaluation of science to for-profit companies and anonymous reviewers for the sake of false objectivity - costs taxpayers dearly.
A unique WWII-era programme in the US, allowed US publishers to reprint exact copies of German-owned science books, to explore how copyrights affect follow-on science. This artificial removal of copyright barriers led to a 25% decline in prices and a 67% increase in citations.
Objections to the Creative Commons attribution licence are straw men raised by parties who want open access to be as closed as possible, warns John Wilbanks.
Ethical, organizational and economic strengths and weaknesses of funder open access platforms: opportunities and threats presented by funder open access platforms in the ongoing transition to open access.
The AI field is increasingly turning to conference publications and free, open-review websites while shunning traditional outlets - sentiments dramatically expressed in a growing boycott of a high-profile AI journal.
Institutions, research funding bodies and publishers must all work together to change the system in the interest of advancing research, says Steven Inchcoombe.
Just as the peer review system of journal publication is itself an ever-evolving construction, so too are the unspoken rules that govern which scientists share what.
Catherine Winchester was hired to ferret out errors and establish routines that promote rigorous research.
Springer Nature, the publisher of science magazines Nature and Scientific American, cancelled its 3.2 billion euro (2.8 billion pound) stock market flotation planned for Wednesday on weak investor demand, dealing a heavy blow to Germany's vibrant IPO season.
Over the past few years, Nature has published editorials extolling the virtues of replication, concluding in one that “We welcome, and will be glad to help disseminate, results that explore the validity of key publications, including our own.” Mante Nieuwland, of the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, and colleagues were encouraged by that message and submitted one such replication attempt to Nature Neuroscience. In a three-part guest post, Nieuwland will describe what happened when they did and discusses whether reality lives up to the rhetoric.
An increasing number of universities are ending, or threatening to end, bundled journal subscriptions with major publishers.
Springer Nature, the publisher of science magazines Nature and Scientific American, cancelled its 3.2 billion euro stock market flotation planned for Wednesday on weak investor demand, dealing a heavy blow to Germany's vibrant IPO season.
In the digital era, each publisher has established its own content platform, to the detriment of the researcher experience. Discovery is fragmented, leading to substantial library investment in order to provide single-index whole-collection search.
Magdalena Skipper, who is currently editor-in-chief of the open-access journal Nature Communications, will become the eighth editor of Nature. She will take over from Philip Campbell, who will move to the newly created post of editor in chief at publisher Springer Nature on 1 July.
More than two thousand researchers have signed a petition to boycott a new Nature journal over the fact it will be available only by subscription.
First female editor in Nature's nearly 150 year history.
Sneha Kulkarni from Editage takes a look at the ever-increasing global scientific output, and asks questions about quantity versus quality.
The financial pressure that publishers impose on libraries is a worldwide concern. Gold open-access publishing with an expensive article-processing charge paid by the authors is often presented as an ideal solution to this problem. However, such a system threatens less-funded departments and even article quality.
When one of the first online science journals went under, its papers all disappeared. Enter: Portico, the Wayback Machine for scholarly publications.
