- Second Edition
- Too much academic research is being published
- After years of academic journals it’s time to shake things up | Science | The Guardian
Flaky Academic Journals Blog. Questionable conferences. How to avoid predatory conferences. Flaky Academic Conferences Blog.
- Through Animals Eyes, Again: Stories of Wildlife Rescue!
- The Future Trends in Academic Publishing.
- The Future Of Academic Publishing Beyond Sci-Hub.
- Leave A Comment?
- Beall's List of Predatory Journals and Publishers - Publishers.
- Contending Visions of the Middle East: The History and Politics of Orientalism, Second Edition (The Contemporary Middle East);
- Radical open-access plan could spell end to journal subscriptions.
Journal Evaluation Tool. Think Check Submit. The Laryngoscope: Predatory journals: Enough is enough. Nature Index: Keep predators at bay with a low-spam diet.
Nature: Predatory journals recruit fake editor. This is a list of questionable, scholarly open-access publishers. We recommend that scholars read the available reviews, assessments and descriptions provided here, and then decide for themselves whether they want to submit articles, serve as editors or on editorial boards.
Too much academic research is being published
Business model. Radical change. Open access. Academic libraries. Elsevier Inc.
- Alex Salmond: My Part in His Downfall: The Cochrane Diaries.
- Beall's List of Predatory Journals and Publishers - Publishers!
- Embedding Evidence-Based Practice in Speech and Language Therapy: International Examples.
- Quick Quilting;
Cope W , Phillips A. Cope, William ; Phillips, Angus.
After years of academic journals it’s time to shake things up | Science | The Guardian
Availability vs. Accessibility The availability of research data has increased on a global scale. As journals have begun to collaborate with data aggregators to produce vast repositories of data, the options for researchers have almost reached the point of being a deluge of data. Data mining algorithms are struggling to keep up with the terabytes of data to be searched, leaving researchers drowning in data, and unless those algorithms are refined and enough specialists are trained to assist researchers in using them, the situation will only get worse.
The peer review process appears to be under more pressure than it has ever been.
Rejected papers have always been blamed on poor peer review rather than acknowledging poor authorship. However, with the current calls for greater transparency, greater oversight, and even a total abolition of the process, the future for peer review looks anything but stable. Retractions inevitably cast doubt on the peer review process, as does a notification of irreproducibility on a study that was accepted for publication — what did the reviewers miss?
The last decade appears to have caught many academic publishers by surprise. A rise in the number of alternative ways to access research, combined with falling confidence in the research integrity of much of the work published in many traditional journals has produced a seismic shift in the industry.