Peer review has long been regarded as a cornerstone of scholarly communication, ensuring high quality and credibility of published research. Although academic journals trace their origins back three ...

Binary reject/accept peer review has become conflated with validation. The authors outline three myths sustaining this confusion and how we might escape it.

Last July, the NIH issued an RFI on limiting direct spending on article processing charges (APCs). Over 900 public responses offered valuable perspectives but also exposed widespread misconceptions about the NIH Public Access Policy and scholarly publishing.

Exploring how visible review processes benefit authors, reviewers, and the wider research community Peer reviewers are essential to scholarly publishing. Their expert feedback provides validation of the research and helps authors improve their academic work. However, this crucial step in publishing research is all too often inaccessible to readers and the reviewers’ work often goes […]

Open publishing can be hard to navigate. There are a lot of options and the definitions vary widely. Discover 13 useful open publishing tools that I think you shouldn't miss!

Publish, Review, Curate (PRC) solves some of the challenges in research communication today. We take a look at the range of organisations working to make PRC a bigger part of scholarly publishing.

Click on the article title to read more.

Published in Learning, Media and Technology (Vol. 49, No. 4, 2024)