Send us a link
Study suggesting that journal-specific submission guidelines may encourage desirable changes in authors’ practices.
Preprints are receiving welcome attention these days for being an integral part of research communication. We announce that starting this week researchers will be able to directly submit their manuscripts to PeerJ for peer review from the popular preprint server bioRxiv.
The editors of scholarly communications are under considerable pressure as recent trends in Gold Open Access characterize them as a luxury of the past.
Is it unethical for a Publisher to extract content from an academic author and commercially benefit from the sale of this without returning any of the economic gains back to the provider of that content or his/her employer?
New eLife's GitHub account to track new software or a new algorithm when they are central to an article and to make sure that the right version of the code that was used within an article persists.
The academic paper has some inherent limitations—chief among them, that it can provide only a summary of a given research project.
An overview of recent events and the current state of preprints in the scholarly communications landscape.
In this blog, I will examine the hypothesis that blogs are, on average, of higher quality than journal articles.
Open data, code, materials and other reasons make blog posts score better on some core scientific values.
You might see science as splashy headlines and a barrage of new results—but in the background are people with emotions and ambitions, politics, and a system that promotes publishing novel findings above all. A new paper on eel navigation highlights some of these systemic troubles.
As per a new open access policy, all academic research from Dutch scientists should be made available under gold open access by 2024.
Creators of a free tool that locates open-access versions of research articles are hoping to make scholarly publishers rethink their business models.
eLife now accepting manuscripts in R Markdow at innovation@elifesciences.org.
Column by Maria Leptin, Director of the European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO)
Springer Nature has developed a standardised, common framework for the research data policies of all its journals.
Technology, greed, a lack of clear rules and norms, hyper-competitiveness and a certain amount of corruption have resulted in confusion and anarchy in the world of scientific communication.
At ScienceOpen, we have over 28 million article records all available for public, post-publication peer review (PPPR), 3 million of which are full-text Open Access. But is there anything we can do to increase its usage and adoption as part of a more open research culture?
Authorea seeks to marry the ease of writing on Word or Google Docs with the power of LaTeX, HTML, and Git.
The European Commission, which spends more than €10 billion annually on research, may set up a “publishing platform” for the scientists it funds, in an attempt to accelerate the transition to open-access publishing in Europe.
Advances in automation technology mean that robots and artificial intelligence programs are capable of performing an ever-greater share of our work,
Commission may follow Wellcome Trust and Gates Foundation in establishing a rapid-publication platform.
Academic publishing is becoming more about establishing a pecking order and less about pursuing knowledge.
Surging investment in machine learning is vaulting Google into the scientific stratosphere.
Citation cartels are groups of researchers and journals that team up with the specific intent of affecting the number of citations their publications receive.
Global health charity is latest funder to start its own publishing ‘channel’ — and the European Commission is considering its own service.
eLife has made it possible to submit the work first to eLife and then post the manuscript directly to bioRxiv.
It is common practice for medical researchers to hoard results for months or years until research is published in an academic journal. Even then, the data underpinning a study are often not made public.
A cross-sectional comparison of characteristics of potential predatory, legitimate open access, and legitimate subscription-based biomedical journals.
In the latest ploy, a group of researchers in Poland tried to seat a fictional scholar onto the editorial boards of 360 academic publications.
