Menu

Category: Peer Review

‘Sokal Squared’: Is Huge Publishing Hoax ‘Hilarious and Delightful’ or an Ugly Example of Dishonesty and Bad Faith? – The Chronicle of Higher Education

From Alexander C. Kafka via the Chronicle of Higher Education:

“James A. Lindsay, Helen Pluckrose, and Peter Boghossian, the academics who carried out a publishing hoax that targeted scholarly journals.

Reactions to an elaborate academic-journal hoax, dubbed “Sokal Squared” by one observer, came fast and furious on Wednesday. Some scholars applauded the hoax for unmasking what they called academe’s leftist, victim-obsessed ideological slant and low publishing standards. Others said it had proved nothing beyond the bad faith and dishonesty of its authors.”

Read more here:

Source: ‘Sokal Squared’: Is Huge Publishing Hoax ‘Hilarious and Delightful’ or an Ugly Example of Dishonesty and Bad Faith? – The Chronicle of Higher Education

Focusing on Value – 102 Things Journal Publishers Do (2018 Update) – The Scholarly Kitchen

From the Scholarly Kitchen:

“The first version of this list was created back in the summer of 2012, at a time when publishers were being challenged repeatedly to prove they added value beyond managing peer review and some basic copy editing and formatting….This update is a reframing and expansion of the list. I’ve changed the motif from the cost perspective (expense, level of difficulty, and duration) to the value perspective (uniqueness, value, importance). The list has always been implicitly a list of things journal publishers do, so this year I’ve made that explicit in the headline. “

Read more here:

Source: Focusing on Value – 102 Things Journal Publishers Do (2018 Update) – The Scholarly Kitchen

Federal Trade Commission and National Institutes of Health Take Action Against Predatory Publishing Practices – The Scholarly Kitchen

From Rick Anderson via the Scholarly Kitchen:

In an interesting and potentially significant move for the scholarly publishing world, the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada has granted a preliminary injunction against a major journal publisher and conference organizer in response to a complaint by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The injunction was granted on the basis of the Court’s analysis of evidence provided by the FTC and its finding that the FTC’s complaint, if allowed to proceed, “is likely to succeed on the merits” and that the public interest would be served by granting it.

Read more here:

Source: Federal Trade Commission and National Institutes of Health Take Action Against Predatory Publishing Practices – The Scholarly Kitchen

Journals Peer Review: Past, Present, Future – The Scholarly Kitchen

From Alice Meadows via Scholarly Kitchen in honor of Peer Review Week:

 

Peer review of journals has been evolving ever since it was first introduced in the seventeenth century. Today there are a multitude of peer review processes, many different flavors of review, and a wealth of new tools and services for editors and reviewers. We asked experts from three very different organizations, each with a strong commitment to peer review, to give us their thoughts on how it’s evolved in their organizations and the communities they serve, how it works today, and what it might look like in future.

Read more here:

Source: Journals Peer Review: Past, Present, Future