1. How to make altmetrics useful in societal impact assessments: shifting from citation to interaction approaches
The suitability of altmetrics for use in assessments of societal impact has been questioned by certain recent studies. In their post in The Impact Blog, Ismael Ràfols, Nicolas Robinson-García and Thed N. van Leeuwen propose that, rather than mimicking citation-based approaches to scientific impact evaluation, assessments of societal impact should be aimed at learning rather than auditing, and focused on understanding the engagement approaches that lead to impact.
The blog post says (quote): Interaction approaches such as SIAMPI or ASIRPA have highlighted that societal impact assessments should not be carried out within the audit framework often applied to them. The lack of robustness, the variability and the uneven coverage of altmetrics make them particularly problematic for assessing societal impact under citation approaches. However, the diversity of altmetric data also makes it valuable for capturing traces of engagement that no other information source can provide. Interaction approaches to altmetrics, developed with networks analysis or other novel visualisation methods, can help altmetrics escape policy pressures pushing for audit assessments and enable the use of social media data in a meaningful and responsible way……………(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
2. Living with an AI: A Glimpse Into The Future
Artificial intelligence is now a commodity appliance. In his post in the Scholarly Kitchen Blog, David Smith discusses what the implications for Scholarly Publishing were.
The blog post says (quote): There will be many more human replacement cycles in the next ten years. This time, it is different, it's not labour that is being replaced its thinking. The repetitive but skilled processes that form white collar roles are now in range. Just how many non-repetitive roles are there in the world of scholarly publishing? Now you can go and spin up a general purpose image processing AI (Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft have these as a service) and feed it a bunch of Northern Blot data. And with that, you can spot any re-purposed or faked data. The publishing industry will need exactly one of these. It will need exactly one of the many other automatable functions……………(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
3. Wither Portable Peer Review
Axios Review, a prominent upstart in providing external peer review, closed its doors on March 1. In his post in the Scholarly Kitchen Blog, Phil Davis discusses if the closing of Axios Review portended the end of independent peer review?
The blog post says (quote): Academics express a lot of goodwill when it comes to peer review. According to an international survey of authors conducted in 2015 by the Publishing Research Consortium and Mark Ware, the overwhelming majority of respondents enjoyed being able to improve a paper and that the act of reviewing connected them to their academic community. In sum, the success of independent (or portable) peer review starts with a strong belief that the traditional journal-centered model of external review using voluntary labour is failing and can be rebuilt (at least for part of the market) with a new model that requires authors, editors, and publishers to change their workflow……………(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
4. Publish or Perish? The Balance Between Public Disclosure and IP Protection in Scientific Research
Public disclosures can destroy intellectual property rights related to the work. Scientists and their attorneys need to strike a delicate balance between competing interests. The balance between publishing and protecting is relatively straightforward if there is clear communication regarding when information will be publicly disclosed, notes Jeremy Cubert, in his post in the JD Supra Perspectives Blog.
The blog post says (quote): In prehistoric days before the internet, accurate information regarding a date certain for publication was readily available from publishers and meeting organisers. With this information in hand, patent attorneys could plan to prepare applications prior to public disclosures of the invention. The "free for all" of information distribution online led to a habit of early release of information. Now, abstracts are published early, often without notice. Open access journals publish articles much more quickly than before. Meeting abstracts are often published prior to the date of a poster's presentation or lecture. Patent practitioners adapted to the brave new world, asking inventors much more detailed questions regarding publication dates, and building in additional time to file patent applications early……………(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
5. Here's how to turn book samples into a powerful B2C tool
Book samples are one of the most under-utilised tools in a publisher or author's marketing arsenal. The problem with the present book sampling model is that it is just some random percentage of the first several pages of the book. The fact that the approach involves no curation means it is efficient but, unfortunately, it is also highly ineffective, notes Joe Wikert, in his post in the Digital Content Strategies Blog.
The blog post says (quote): The samples feature more of the valuable content nuggets and enable readers to get a better sense of what they can expect to find in the full book. You are not giving away all the book's key ingredients, but you are definitely providing readers with more value than they will find in a typical ebook sample. These samples are delivered via email, so that means they were able to establish a direct relationship with prospective customers, a critical step for a B2C business model. Having access to those names and email addresses means they were able to build the B2C list and dramatically increase up-/cross-sell activities……………(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
Leave a Reply