Send us a link
Supporting information access in low- and middle-income countries: the latest analysis of the Research4Life user experience.
There are quite a few ways to shift bad behaviors and habits of reviewers to become not just good, but great peer reviewers.
At a recent meeting, a debate was held on the motion: Preprints are going to replace journals. The author was asked to oppose the motion and this post is based on their arguments.
Why did a certain band eliminate brown M&M's from their dressing room? And what does that have to do with the formatting requirements at some journals? This article explains.
Meredith Adinolfi (Cell Press) and Ann Michael (DeltaThink) discuss some of the more complex aspects of the OA landscape, such as funder mandates, Plan S, and transformative agreements.
Lots of things are wrong with paying for peer review.
AAAS continues its commitment to the subscription model to praise from cOAlition S. Are there lessons for other publishers?
Liz Bal from Jisc discusses the scholarly publishing lessons learned from COVID-19, and how they can be applied to make research communication more efficient and effective.
Today's guest post is a recap of the recent SSP webinar, Ask the Experts: Trust in Science, with Tracey Brown (Sense About Science), Richard Sever (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press), and Eefke Smith (STM) by the moderator, Anita de Waard (Elsevier).
We should strive for open but also be realistic about the options truly available to researchers and discuss them transparently and honestly, argues Dustin Fife.
A recent Scholarly Kitchen webinar on global open access shared perspectives from Latin America, Asia and Africa.
Revisiting a 2018 post discussing that for social science and humanities researchers in many parts of the world there are significant barriers to conducting and sharing research, in some cases more so than for science and medicine. In this revisited guest post, Dr. Naveen Minai provides a perspective as a gender studies researcher in Pakistan.
A look at a session from last week's CHORUS Forum that discussed new open access business models -- what does it take to make them work?
Getting digitized primary source materials into the classroom requires an open dialogue among researchers, teachers, and archivists. A workshop from historians of business shows how.
Like all OA funding models, subscribe-to-open solves some problems while creating others. Some of the downsides are pretty fundamental.
Study of researchers indicates that a preprint or accepted manuscript can substitute for the version of record in some use cases but not all.
Global study of the effects of COVID-19 on research funding, publishing, and library budgets - the truth we found in the gap between perception and reality
Preprints play a crucial role in open science but offer an opportunity to be gamed. Fictitious authorship in preprints show that open science needs checks and we need to collaborate to govern Open Science.
The newly announced California/Elsevier transformative agreement will test the financial sustainability and the financial desirability of the multi-payer model.
Unpacking each word -- rights, retention, and strategy -- enables understanding what this policy is and how it functions within the Plan S compliance framework.
Scholarly publishers still do not meet researchers' needs. Doing so would require that they rethink existing businesses and organizational models.
Will history judge? Reflections from historians about the intense relationship of past and present.
Susan Spilka analyzes a series of surveys from Emerald Publishing that asked both academics and the general public about the value of diversity, equity, and inclusion to society.
