Guest Post — The Efficacy of ChatGPT: Is it Time for the Librarians to Go Home?

In preparation for a presentation, Curtis Kendrick tried ChatGPT to see what it (they?) had to say. The results at first seemed credible, but where ChatGPT failed miserably was in the non-existent citations it provided.

The post Guest Post — The Efficacy of ChatGPT: Is it Time for the Librarians to Go Home? appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

Chefs de Cuisine: Perspectives from Publishing’s Top Table — Mandy Hill

Robert Harington talks to Mandy Hill, Managing Director of Academic Publishing at Cambridge University Press in this new series of perspectives from some of publishing’s leaders across the non-profit and profit sectors of our industry.

The post Chefs de Cuisine: Perspectives from Publishing’s Top Table — Mandy Hill appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

Editors can’t spot talent. I’ve heard this joke before. It isn’t funny

Editors at The BMJ are lousy at predicting the citation performance of research papers. Or are they?

The post Editors can’t spot talent. I’ve heard this joke before. It isn’t funny appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

Project Retain Preliminary Findings: Rights Retention, Licensing & Copyright

Did you know that over 60 European higher education institutions have policies covering the copyright of research publications and almost 45 institutions either have or will soon have rights retention policies […]

The post Project Retain Preliminary Findings: Rights Retention, Licensing & Copyright appeared first on SPARC Europe.

The Predator Effect – Fraud in the Scholarly Publishing Industry: An Interview with Simon Linacre

An interview by @lisalibrarian with Simon Linacre, author of “The Predator Effect”

The post The Predator Effect – Fraud in the Scholarly Publishing Industry: An Interview with Simon Linacre appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

Innovation at eLife: An Interview with Damian Pattinson

eLife’s recent announcement that it will reinvent itself as a “service that reviews preprints” has generated much discussion over recent weeks. But what are the primary drivers and goals, and what might we all learn from this bold experiment?

The post Innovation at eLife: An Interview with Damian Pattinson appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

A Failure to Communicate: Indicators of Open Access in the User Interface

Though open access indicators within a given publishing platform are relatively consistent, significant inconsistency across platforms likely creates user confusion.

The post A Failure to Communicate: Indicators of Open Access in the User Interface appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

OPERAS signs Agreement for Reforming Research Assessment and provides services for researchers

OPERAS has signed the Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment, an initiative that gathers more than 180 signatories, including public and private research funders, universities, research centres, institutes and infrastructures, associations (and alliances thereof), national and regional authorities, accreditation and evaluation agencies, learned societies and associations of researchers, and other relevant organisations, representing a broad diversity of views and perspectives. Many OPERAS members have already signed the document. 

The agreement aims to recognise the diverse outputs, practices and activities that maximise the quality and impact of research for the research, researchers and research organisations assessment. The document sets a shared direction for changes in the research assessment practices, including principles, commitments and timeframe for reforms. The new vision for the research assessment requires that it will be based primarily on a qualitative judgement, for which peer review is central, and supported by responsible use of quantitative indicators. 

As the Research Infrastructure dedicated to supporting the whole research lifecycle of Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) in Europe, OPERAS is taking part in CoARA and invites all its members to sign the agreement. OPERAS supports CoARA’s vision of innovative and open research assessment practices, which can be adapted to the diversity of scientific disciplines. 

OPERAS commitment in signing includes the provision of services that can enable the full range of practices in the SSH field, where there is still a lack of tools and indicators. Some examples would be

  • quality assurance services such as the PRISM (Peer Review Information Service for Monographs) to increase trust in Open Access book publishing by improving transparency around the quality assurance process (peer review procedure);
  • the Metrics Service Portal, which collects usage and impact metrics related to published Open Access content from many different sources and allows for their access, display and analysis from a single access point;
  • the GoTriple platform, a multilingual and multicultural discovery service, that provides better findability of research results;
  • the Pathfinder service to support academic open access publishing.

The issue of reforming research assessment will be also included among the topics of the relevant OPERAS Special Interest Groups (Advocacy and Standards). 

The agreement’s initiative followed a call of interest by the European Commission, in January 2022, to be drafted in a co-creation exercise. Since July 2022, the document was publicly presented (read it via this link). The Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA) is now being created and has an interim secretariat provided by Science Europe, the European University Association (EUA) and the European Commission

Commitment of existing and new members 

By advocating for a change in the research assessment and supporting CoARA, OPERAS is including the commitment to recognise all research outputs and to experiment new indicators and tools in its new members’ application form. The infrastructure encourages existing members to sign the Agreement and to be active parts of the Coalition as research performing organisations. 

The Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment is based on 10 Commitments, which include topics such as the recognition of the diversity of contributions of research according to its needs and nature; the basing of research assessment primarily on qualitative evaluation; the purpose to abandon inappropriate uses of journal and publication-based metrics; the avoidance of ranking usage for research organisations; the commitment of resources in organisations to the reform of the research assessment; the reviewing and development of criteria, tools, and processes; the raising of awareness on the reform; the communication on progress made on the implementation of the Commitments; and the evaluation of practices, criteria and tools based on state-of-the-art research. The list of Commitments, their scopes and purposes are available in this link

As stated by CoARA’s announcement on the Agreement, the reform movement underpinned by both the document and the coalition intends to be a space to advance together towards a higher quality, more impactful and more efficient, inclusive system. 

| More information | 

Read the Agreement full-text here.

Smorgasbord: Twitter v. Mastodon; Incentivizing Open Science; DEI v. Involution

Another “mixed bag” post from us — Is it time to leave Twitter? How can we incentivize journals and authors to take up open science practices? What is “involution” and is DEIA the solution?

The post Smorgasbord: Twitter v. Mastodon; Incentivizing Open Science; DEI v. Involution appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

Guest Post – Wikipedia’s Citations Are Influencing Scholars and Publishers

Rachel Helps, the Wikipedian-in-residence at the BYU libraries discusses the intersection of scholarly journals and Wikipedia.

The post Guest Post – Wikipedia’s Citations Are Influencing Scholars and Publishers appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

Speculation on the Most Likely OSTP Nelson Memo Implementation Scenario and the Resulting Publisher Strategies

What is the most likely scenario for implementation of the OSTP’s Nelson Memo? And what strategies will that offer for publishers?

The post Speculation on the Most Likely OSTP Nelson Memo Implementation Scenario and the Resulting Publisher Strategies appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

It Isn’t Fake Science, Because It Isn’t Science at All. It’s Dupery.

What if even by saying “fake science” you inadvertently participate in a scam? What if this phrase legitimizes fraud, lies, and deceit?  Let’s call it what it is – dupery.

The post It Isn’t Fake Science, Because It Isn’t Science at All. It’s Dupery. appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.