Send us a link
To claim credit for a discovery, we publish it in a peer-reviewed journal; to get a job in academia or money to run a lab, we present piles of these published papers to universities and funding agencies. Publishing is so embedded in the practice of science that whoever controls the journals controls access to the entire profession. It is, therefore, worth examining to whom we have entrusted the keys to the kingdom of science.
A market place for scientific and scholarly journals which publish articles in open access. Quality scoring of the journals in QOAM is based on academic crowd sourcing; price information includes institutional licensed pricing.
Consortium backed by US NIH is first major biology programme to mandate online publication of results ahead of peer review.
In an era of online discussion, debate must remain nuanced and courteous.
John Wiley & Sons Inc. announced today plans to require ORCID iDs as part of the manuscript submission process for a large number of journals. Beginning in winter 2016, more than 500 Wiley journals using ScholarOne Manuscripts will require the submitting author (only) to provide an ORCID identifier (iD) when submitting a manuscript. Wiley is proud to be the first major publisher to join other stakeholders that have signed ORCID’s open letter.
Every scientist wants his or her paper to appear in Cell, Nature or Science. In today’s scientific world, being associated with such publications is synonymous with prestige and excellence, opening doors to top positions and coveted awards.
While the total output of the eleven open-access mega-journals grew by 14.9% between 2014 and 2015, this growth is largely attributable to the increased output of Scientific Reports and Medicine.
The first articles have gone live on Wellcome Open Research; 15 of them in total, with more submissions in the pipeline.
Biologists in particular are writing their papers in a less formal style.
Open publishing platforms that bring grey literature out of the dark promise to save money, reduce duplication and speed communication
GitHub is not a solution to the problem of making scripts and software available as part of the permanent record of a publication. But the folk at Zenodo and Mozilla Science Lab (in collaboration with Figshare) have solutions for you now.
The traditional mode of publishing scientific research faces much criticism – primarily for being too slow and sometimes shoddily done. Maybe fewer publications of higher quality is the way forward.
eLife has appointed Paul Shannon as its new Head of Technology to oversee the development of tools and software in support of science communication.
The Winnower will power a range of publishing services for researchers who are writing on Authorea.
The knowledge that we produce in our publicly funded works belongs to humankind and must not be locked up behind pay-walls— newly submitted papers should be open-access and older ones open-archive.
How should the scientific publication process be rethought to be more meritocratic?
Funders and publishers have something in common: for better or worse, we have the ability to influence the behavior of researchers.
Cull of papers follows similar discoveries in 2015.
Peer review publications remain a key stage in the quality assurance of new research, but some comments can be the stuff of nightmares.
For some time now PLOS has discussed new initiatives designed to accelerate research communication.
A paper that suggests that the imposition of arbitrary manuscript length limits discourages the publication of more impactful studies.
Rejection rates in Frontiers journals are around ~27%, most manuscripts are published within 3 months, and yet, Frontiers’ citations rates are amongst the very highest.
New service offers a rigorous independent peer review and helps you publish quickly in the best possible journal. Submission is free.
Nature’s new kid on the block Scientific Reports is now the biggest journal in the world. But while such giants are currently overturning the world of scholarly publishing, their long-term future is unclear.
We should write our draft, go over it with our co-authors, and then put it on a preprint server. And wait. After a year, when we had the opportunity to share this paper with colleagues, then we can submit it.
To support the long-term growth of eLife we are going to introduce a publication fee of $2500
Women publish and review less than men in American Geophysical Union journals, but have a higher acceptance rate.
The open-access journal eLife is dropping one of its most distinctive features: free publishing. From 2017, it will charge a fee of $2,500 for all accepted papers.
That Sci-Hub’s activities are illegal is not disputed. However, according to Iván Farías Pelcastre and Flor González Correa the issue at the core of the debate is the current publishing and knowled…
With a focus on deep reporting, a print magazine, and an intense affinity for illustrations, nonprofit Nautilus has taken an expensive approach to launching a new science publication.
