arXiv, and the scientific community at large, are facing a watershed moment. Scholarly publishing is currently changing at a rapid pace, and we are seeing a…

This moderation policy is now supplemented by our AI Policy, here. If your paper has been rejected and you would like to appeal the decision, use this form. Policy revision date October 2025, by th…

YouTube video by Dr. Alex Hanna

Today's guest post asks: Do trust markers and other systematic fraud-prevention practices exclude unaffiliated authors from contributing to the scholarly record?

The Center for Open Science has announced that from November 16, 2026, no new projects can be created on the Open Science Framework. After F...

There’s a saying in the management world, popularized by NASA administrator Daniel Goldin in the 1990s, that the goal of technological improvements is to make products faster, better, and cheaper. Alt...

Published in Journal of Moral Education (Ahead of Print, 2026)

Today's post explains how the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) is resisting the proposed rule changes for US federal grants.

It’s past time for social scientists to bring their work out into the open, to make it better, faster, more accountable, and more transparent.

The recent launch of qed’s “top 1%” preprint ranking has sparked controversy, with concerns about its arbitrary nature, potential harm to authors, and low-quality inclusions. Whil…

Podcast Episode · For Sociology · May 21 · 47m

The preprint server is the latest to impose stiff penalties on authors who contribute to AI ‘slop’ — but not everyone is convinced it’s the right approach.

AI research tools are trained on a literature that is structured by an unequal distribution of attention. Does their use simply recreate these biases ?