Public Knowledge Project - PKP is a multi-university initiative developing (free) open source software and conducting research to improve the quality and reach of scholarly publishing.

In this article Robert Harington assesses the Diamond open access model for society journal publishing.

Today we’re rolling out new features in Sheets that make it even easier for you to visualize and share your data, and find insights your teams can act on.

Putting together applications and seeking nominations can bring their own professional rewards

Partly in response to the so-called 'reproducibility crisis' in science, researchers are embracing a set of practices that aim to make the whole endeavor more transparent, more reliable – and better.

Is citation manipulation a moral problem or an accounting problem?

We find Nature Research's critical attitude towards journal impact factors, embodied in its signing of the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA; Nature 544, 394; 2017), to be inconsistent with the aims of its Nature Index.

What do they mean for Science and Research?

With competition for research funding approaching an all-time high, experts reveal their top tips and tricks.

What happens when an experiment is correct, but it's really hard to replicate? Are there research results that are accurate but not reproducible?

The scholarly process is ridden with single points of failures at all stages.

10 stories from users of the Open Access Button on why they need research to be freely available.

At the Researcher to Reader conference, a volunteer project called Project Cupcake was launched to define a new suite of indicators to help researchers judge publishers, rather than the other way around.

Exploring the diverse pathways traveled by science, engineering, and health doctorates as they progress through their careers.

Continuous data validation, as a service.

Charlie Rapple highlights the case of Diego Gómez, a Columbian researcher facing prison for sharing someone else's thesis via Scribd.

Relying just on numbers to assess gender equality is insufficient because companies and researchers are smart enough to game the system.

An amusing case of plagiarism in a paper about plagiarism.

In this interview, we have a discussion with the co-founder of PaperHive, Alexander Naydenov about the impact PaperHive has had on ESL authors.

The imprimatur bestowed by peer review has a history that is both shorter and more complex than many scientists realize.

While preprints have been around since before arXiv.org launched in 1991, fields outside of physics are starting to push for more early sharing of research data, results and conclusions.

The business of scholarship.

A list of people to follow on the preprints subject.

Recently, our colleagues at OpenAIRE have published a systematic review of ‘Open Peer Review’ (OPR). As part of this, they defined seven consistent traits of OPR, which we thought sounded like a remarkably good opportunity to help clarify how peer review works at ScienceOpen. At ScienceOpen, we have over 31 million article records all available for …

Which platforms exist? Does it work? And what is funded?

A brief summary of the main citation indicators used today.

Re-structuring presentation programmes could make meetings more accessible.

What policymakers want from scientists, and what were the implications for synthesising evidence in ways that meet policy needs?

A call to simplify an overly complicated process