If science is to be both honest and healthy, we must accept that statistically non-significant results are part of reality. The SAMPL guidelines, if adopted widely by scholarly publishers and journal editors, hold a solution for authors who worry their results are not "significant." The post Guest Post — When Significance Hurts: What the SAMPL Guidelines Can Teach Us appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.| The Scholarly Kitchen
Today, we speak with Prof. Yana Suchikova about GAIDeT, the Generative AI Delegation Taxonomy, which enables researchers to disclose the use of generative AI in an honest and transparent way.| The Scholarly Kitchen
"Forgeries of this calibre make me think anything ever published by Sliwinski, Skorski and their associates is made up. In an ideal world, hundreds of articles by these people showing just tables and graphs should get retracted " - Aneurus Inconstans| For Better Science
"If you need a graphics designer with basic photo shop skills to tune up your data, they might be the right team for the job!" - Fabian Wittmers| For Better Science
As Australia's top neuroscientist Matthew Kiernan sacks people, questions arise: are his drawings still science or already art?| For Better Science
"Authors thank the members of NeuroDigitech for their contribution to data generation, and all the animals that contributed to these studies."| For Better Science
Peer Community In è una iniziativa editoriale interessante che si basa sul modello Publish Review Curate. Il sito fornisce molte informazioni e molti spunti, e uno degli aspetti interessanti è la serie di webinar che vengono offerti alle comunità scientifiche. Tutti i temi trattati sono di estrema attualità, in un sistema editoriale che in questi …| Open Science @Unimi
Tony Alves reflects on the 2025 Peer Review Congress and the rapid evolution of discussions about AI and peer review since 2022. The post Guest Post – How the AI Debate Has Changed in Just a Few Short Years appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.| The Scholarly Kitchen
AI has opened a new chapter in the saga of science and peer review. Today, guest author Prof. Nihar B. Shah explains how, if guided with integrity, AI can open galaxies of possibilities.| The Scholarly Kitchen
Today, we talk to thought leaders Helen King and Chris Leonard, who offer a nuanced look at how peer review might adapt, fracture, or reinvent itself in the AI era.| The Scholarly Kitchen
" I can't even begin to imagine the psychological damage of joining a lab as a new postgrad student and having people like Ryan F. Donelly as your supervisor and Andi as the postdoc, it must be heartbreaking. " - Sholto David| For Better Science
How Robin Ali and other London ophthalmologists make blind mice and blind children see.| For Better Science
The future of peer review isn’t about choosing between humans and AI, or between speed and quality, but about combining the strengths of both to enable speed with quality, to ensure quality, ethics, and trust in the scholarly record.| The Scholarly Kitchen
Silverchair was proud to be a silver sponsor of the 10th International Congress on Peer Review, held earlier this month in Chicago. The research-focused conference highlighted several critical challenges facing... The post Recap: 2025 Peer Review Congress appeared first on Silverchair.| Silverchair
Peer Review Quality Ratings could offer a powerful step toward restoring faith in the scholarly research system, highlight exemplary practices, and ensure that robust, verified science continues to illuminate the path forward for humanity. The post Guest Post — Is It Enough to Say a Journal Is ‘Peer Reviewed’? The Case for Rating Journals Based on Peer Review Quality appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.| The Scholarly Kitchen
To kick off Peer Review Week, we asked the Chefs, What’s a bold experiment with AI in peer review you’d like to see tested?| The Scholarly Kitchen
What can you expect from this fall’s New Directions in Scholarly Publishing Seminar in Washington, DC?| The Scholarly Kitchen
Today's guest post discusses research metrics and their relationship to research integrity, inclusivity, and long-term impact.| The Scholarly Kitchen
In an era of information abundance and epistemic chaos, libraries serve as crucial sites for democratic knowledge practices -- protecting them is critical to preserving the infrastructure of informed citizenship itself.| The Scholarly Kitchen
Summing up the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Forum discussion on Emerging AI Dilemmas in Scholarly Publishing, which explored the many challenges AI presents for the scholarly community.| The Scholarly Kitchen
Digital Science investigations show researchers associated with a fictitious research network and funding source have netted millions of taxpayers' dollars in funding. The post Digital Science investigation shows millions of taxpayers’ money has been awarded to researchers associated with fictitious network appeared first on Digital Science.| Digital Science
Will Vilhelm win a Nobel Prize of his own? And for what?| For Better Science
Trust in science is under threat from manipulation and disinformation. We need new tools like the Dimensions Author Check to protect research integrity.| Dimensions
Predatory journals prioritize self-interest, often financial, over scholarship They provide false information about their identity (eg, fake impact factors, misrepresented editorial boards), deviate from best editorial and publication practices, and lack transparency in operations (eg, editorial decisions, fees, peer review processes), along with aggressive solicitations of authors. Questa la definizione di rivista predatoria accolta in …| Open Science @Unimi
In un recente articolo pubblicato da PNAS e subito ripreso da Science si descrivono gli esiti di una ricerca che mira a tracciare i contorni della frode scientifica e che da attività individuale sembra invece essersi trasformata in un business vero e proprio.| Open Science @Unimi
Emerald Publishing has adopted Dimensions Author Check from Digital Science as part of Emerald’s ongoing commitment to research integrity.| Digital Science
If you missed any of our Q2 events, we invite you to catch up with the replays and downloadable presentations.| ORCID
How does the Directory of Open Access Books navigate challenges to instill trust and transparency. Part 1 of 2.| The Scholarly Kitchen
The analysis of operational data is complex, dull, and unrewarding. It is also necessary. Three case studies of major journals and portfolios explain why.| The Scholarly Kitchen
Science is built on a foundation of rigor and credibility. Preprints are adding to the crumbling of that foundation, which is already under attack by anti-science political agendas.| The Scholarly Kitchen
How are emerging trends in open research shaping the future of academia, and what challenges do they present? As international collaborations grow, what benefits do they offer, and what risks might they introduce? This article delves into these critical questions, examining their impact on the global research landscape – as highlighted by Dimensions data and […]| Dimensions
Dr Leslie McIntosh, Vice President of Research Integrity at Digital Science, recently shared her insights on how Dimensions Author Check addresses some of the challenges related to research integrity.| Dimensions
Lately, there have been many headlines on scientific fraud and journal article retractions. If this trend continues, it represents a serious threat […]| Social Science Space
Adapting to AI requires a commitment to fostering AI literacy and creating spaces to openly discuss its challenges and implications.| The Scholarly Kitchen
At the end of each quarter we’ll revisit past events and provide our community with a chance to catch up on anything they might have missed, including links to the […] The post 2025 First Quarter Events Roundup appeared first on ORCID.| ORCID
GPT based text generators like ChatGPT or Microsoft Copilot have rapidly become a “cultural sensation”. This document provides scientific background and guidance on how to think critically and mindfully about these tools in academic writing and research.| The Ideophone
What can be done to resolve concerns about image integrity in scientific publications?| The Scholarly Kitchen
Image integrity has been a growing issue in scholarly publishing. Todd Carpenter suggests we addreess the problem of image integrity at scale| The Scholarly Kitchen
Like Tolkien's “Ents” marched against deforestation, scholars, scientists, and their supporters must awaken to the widespread risks of these authoritarian trends and unite their efforts in resistance.| The Scholarly Kitchen
I tried three different large language models (LLMs) to rewrite a potential article.| The Scholarly Kitchen
“Expressions of Concern may be used as an interim notice to flag a potential issue that may be ultimately resolved with another amendment outcome (e.g. retraction or correction) or they may r…| For Better Science
“One of the UK research system’s strengths is having established processes that allow for this review so that we maintain an accurate and robust research record. Promoting and improving this …| For Better Science
In response to US government efforts to censor research and researchers, a small group of scholarly communications professionals have launched a Declaration to defend research. Learn more in today's post by Alice Meadows, one of the members of this group.| The Scholarly Kitchen
Many publishers are getting nervous about infiltration by paper mills, who can torpedo a journal's reputation when they succeed in publishing papers that are obvious nonsense. In a recent Open Letter, a group of sleuths drew attention to an example in Scientific Reports, published by Springer Nature. | BishopBlog
16th October 2024 | BishopBlog
By Paola Galimberti The editorial note recently published in JASSS (Squazzoni 2025) focuses on the central role of peer review, an issue that has now become central to the debate on scholarly commu…| Review of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation
Self-archiving on personal sites is perfectly permitted under many journal data policies. But what happens when an author alters the underlying data?| The Scholarly Kitchen
The scholarly community is collectively facing a looming crisis as more false research is slipping into publication, threatening the integrity of the scholarly record. At ORCID, we believe we have […] The post Trust Markers in ORCID Records: Verified Email Domains appeared first on ORCID.| ORCID
“No paper — I would wager quite heavily that a large percentage, probably over 90% of papers in the public domain, have errors in them. Whether or not they be known, I would suggest th…| For Better Science
“The Investigative Committee notes that the infractions to normal scientific conduct surveyed in this report were blatant and repeated. Dr. [XY] should be dealt with in a manner consistent to…| For Better Science
It is essential to address the hidden costs of retraction and to discuss who needs to bear this cost.| The Scholarly Kitchen
What can we do to encourage and improve methods reporting in scientific articles? A new report summarizes recommendations for editors and publishers alike.| The Scholarly Kitchen
Do publishers really understand what tools researchers are using and how they are using them? Can we do more to create better policies based on real use cases and not hypothetical conjecture about what AI might do in the future?| The Scholarly Kitchen
“Every now and again, it is a good idea to open the door of the clown car that is MD Anderson, and see who climbs out. Today is the turn of Kapil N. Bhalla. If you say his name quickly, it so…| For Better Science
