Étiquette : scientific communication

Researchers’ Views on Preprints and Open Access Publishing: Results From a Free-Answer Survey of Japanese Molecular Biologists

Auteur de l’article Par Hans Dillaerts
Date de l’article 23 janvier 2026

Authors : Harufumi Tamazawa, Kazuki Ide, Kazuhisa Kamegai

A survey conducted in 2022 amongst members of the Molecular Biology Society of Japan (n = 633) about preprints and open access journals included qualitative data from free-response answers (n = 161). Analysis of the free-form responses suggests that researchers believe that peer review of papers is the foundation for ensuring the credibility of research content.

The trust-building mechanism achieved through peer review shapes the research community. For this reason, researchers are extremely cautious about preprints that have not undergone peer review within their own fields.

This foundation has fostered a sense of responsibility within the community, and this sense of responsibility, which is being fulfilled by ensuring the quality of research, is a mixture of both a sense of responsibility towards the community itself and a sense of responsibility towards the outside world, namely the relationship between researchers and society.

Researchers also appear to view the rise in Article Processing Charges (APCs) as a problem for the entire community, rather than simply an issue for individual researchers. In the field of molecular biology, where collaborative research between universities and companies is common, differences in normative awareness based on position are reflected in the various attitudes towards preprints and open access.

URL : Researchers’ Views on Preprints and Open Access Publishing: Results From a Free-Answer Survey of Japanese Molecular Biologists

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.2039

Étiquettes biomedical research, Harufumi Tamazawa, Japan, Kazuhisa Kamegai, Kazuki Ide, open access, open access publishing, Peer Review, Preprint, scientific communication, scientific practices

Pursuing transparency: How research performing organizations in Germany collect data on publication costs

Auteur de l’article Par Hans Dillaerts
Date de l’article 15 janvier 2026

Authors : Dorothea Strecker, Heinz Pampel, Jonas Höfting

This article presents the results of a survey conducted in 2024 among research performing organizations (RPOs) in Germany on how they collect data on publication costs. Of the 583 invitees, 258 (44.3%) completed the questionnaire.

This survey is the first comprehensive study on the recording of publication costs at RPOs in Germany.

The results show that the majority of surveyed RPOs recorded publication costs at least in part. However, procedures in this regard were often non-binding. Respondents’ ratings of the reliability of the collection of data on publication costs varied by the source of publication funding.

Eighty percent of respondents rated the contribution of collecting data on publication costs to shaping the open access transformation as « very important » or « important. » Yet, these data were used as a basis for strategic decisions in only 59% of the surveyed RPOs.

Moreover, most respondents considered the implementation of an information budget at their institutions by 2025 unlikely. We discuss the implications of these findings for the open access transformation.

URL : https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.08340

Étiquettes article-processing charges, Dorothea Strecker, Germany, Heinz Pampel, Jonas Höfting, Scholarly Publishing, scientific communication

Opening Pandora’s box: Developing reviewer rhetorical sensitivity through retracted articles

Auteur de l’article Par Hans Dillaerts
Date de l’article 8 janvier 2026

Author : Baraa Khuder

Retractions issued for misconduct offer a unique window into how questionable research is rhetorically constructed and made to appear credible. This study investigates how engaging with retracted articles can serve as a pedagogical tool for reviewer training, with particular attention to the rhetorical mechanisms through which unreliability is performed.

Twenty STEM doctoral researchers analyzed self-selected retracted papers using guided critical-reading questions to identify problematic rhetorical features. Across the analyses, five recurring issues emerged: intertextual falsification, methodological opacity, rhetorical inconsistency, rhetorical overstatement, and terminological distortion.

The findings indicate that this approach has the potential to raise doctoral students’ rhetorical sensitivity by enabling them to detect subtle markers of unreliability and to adopt a more evaluative rhetorical stance toward scholarly texts.

Retracted articles thus can provide an authentic pedagogical resource for developing reviewer rhetorical sensitivity within doctoral education.

URL : Opening Pandora’s box: Developing reviewer rhetorical sensitivity through retracted articles

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2025.2607681

Étiquettes Baraa Khuder, Peer Review, Retractions of Publications, scientific communication

A Cross-Disciplinary Analysis of AI Policies in Academic Peer Review

Auteur de l’article Par Hans Dillaerts
Date de l’article 7 janvier 2026

Authors : Zhongshi Wang, Mengyue Gong

Rapid advances of artificial intelligence (AI) have substantially impacted the field of academic publishing. This study examines AI integration in peer review by analysing policies from 439 high- and 363 middle-impact factor (IF) journals across disciplines. Using grounded theory, we identify patterns in AI policy adoption.

Results show 83% of high-IF journals have AI guidelines, with varying stringency across disciplines. Meanwhile, only 75% of middle-IF journals have AI guidelines. Science, technology, and medicine (STM) disciplines exhibit stricter regulations, while humanities and social sciences adopt more lenient approaches.

Key ethical concerns focus on confidentiality risks, accountability gaps, and AI’s inability to replicate critical human judgement. Publisher policies emphasise transparency, human oversight, and restricted AI usage for auxiliary tasks only, such as grammar checks or reviewer finding.

Disciplinary differences highlight the need for tailored guidelines that balance efficiency gains with research integrity. This study proposes collaborative frameworks for responsible AI integration. It focuses on accountability, transparency, and interdisciplinary policy development to address peer review challenges.

URL : A Cross-Disciplinary Analysis of AI Policies in Academic Peer Review

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.2035

Étiquettes Artificial intelligence, Mengyue Gong, Peer Review, scientific communication, Zhongshi Wang

And then a miracle occurs—a review of theory of change models for societal impact of research

Auteur de l’article Par Hans Dillaerts
Date de l’article 17 décembre 2025

Authors : Ole Henning Sørensen, Stine Dandanell Garn, Steffen Bohni Nielsen

Through an umbrella review, this article identified and surveyed 24 societal impact of research (SIR) models. Most of these models were developed within health domains and in Anglo-Saxon countries. The authors mapped the SIR models against constituent components of a robust theory of change.

The study found that logic models were predominantly used to conceive SIR models. Yet, only nine models had explicit causal links, and only two made explicit assumptions about why research contributes to societal change.

The old proverb among evaluators—when using theories of change to describe change—“and then a miracle occurs…,” rings uncomfortably true to the current state of SIR theorizing. Further theorizing and conceptual clarity are needed to advance the science of research impact.

URL : And then a miracle occurs—a review of theory of change models for societal impact of research

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvaf057

Étiquettes Ole Henning Sørensen, research impact, scientific communication, societal impact, Steffen Bohni Nielsen, Stine Dandanell Garn

The Drain of Scientific Publishing

Auteur de l’article Par Hans Dillaerts
Date de l’article 16 décembre 2025

Authors : Fernanda Beigel, Dan Brockington, Paolo Crosetto, Gemma Derrick, Aileen Fyfe, Pablo Gomez Barreiro, Mark A. Hanson, Stefanie Haustein, Vincent Larivière, Christine Noe, Stephen Pinfield, James Wilsdon

The domination of scientific publishing in the Global North by major commercial publishers is harmful to science.

We need the most powerful members of the research community, funders, governments and Universities, to lead the drive to re-communalise publishing to serve science not the market.

DOI : https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2511.04820

Étiquettes Aileen Fyfe, Christine Noe, Dan Brockington, Fernanda Beigel, Gemma Derrick, James Wilsdon, Mark A. Hanson, Pablo Gómez Barreiro, Paolo Crosetto, Scholarly Publishing, scientific communication, Stefanie Haustein, Stephen Pinfield, Vincent Larivière