Something rotten
Something is rotten in the state of academic publishing. But even those of us in the thick of it find it hard to pinpoint exactly what is wrong.
Send us a link
Stop the deluge of science research
The increasing pace of human discovery is a curse – we need to rethink what it means to publish the results of research.
The 1% of scientific publishing
A new study finds that very few scientists (fewer than 1%) manage to publish a paper every year. But these scientists dominate the research journals, having their names on 41% of all papers.
Science joins push to screen statistics in papers
New policy follows efforts by other journals to bolster standards of data analysis.
Publisher, be damned! From price gouging to the open road
Why has academic knowledge become more expensive for consumers while music has become less expensive, and what can we do about it? Doing nothing to prevent the trading of electronic copies of our academic work could act to circumvent the perils of engagement with the academic publishing industry.
The inside track
Members of the US National Academy of Sciences have long enjoyed a privileged path to publication in PNAS. Meet the scientists who use it most heavily.
How much did your university pay for your journals?
A new study shows universities pay more or less for academic journal bundles than would be expected based simply on size or number of Ph.D.s granted.
The number of scholarly documents on the public web
The lower bound number of scholarly documents, published in English, available on the web is roughly 114 million.
How long does it take to publish a paper?
The answer is - in our experience, at least - about 9 months. That's right, it takes about the same amount of time to have a baby as it does to publish a scientific paper.
Credit where credit is due
Liz Allen, Amy Brand, Jo Scott, Micah Altman and Marjorie Hlava are trialling digital taxonomies to help researchers to identify their contributions to collaborative projects. Research today is rarely a one-person job.
Elsevier admits it has been mis-selling open access and will be contacting mis-sold customers
Elsevier admits it has been mis-selling open access and will be contacting mis-sold customers
Comment of Elsevier's Director of Access and Policy on a blog
Why publishing everything is more effective than selective publishing of statistically significant results
Why publishing everything is more effective than selective publishing of statistically significant results
Publishing everything is more effective than only reporting significant outcomes.
Boycotting academic publishers is a career risk for young scientists
Research careers are built on publishing in high-profile journals, so can postdocs be expected to take a stand against them?
Google Scholar wins raves—but can it be trusted?
Over the past year, Jonathan Eisen's reading habits have changed dramatically. For most of the past 2 decades, he has kept up with scientific literature primarily by combing PubMed. But these days Eisen, an evolutionary biologist, discovers research relevant to his own work without even looking for it.
Why we are not ready for radical changes in science publishing
There are indeed concerns about the current science publishing model, but until major changes in grant funding are incorporated, researchers will continue to lust after publications in high-tier journals.
×