#scholarlypublishing — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #scholarlypublishing, aggregated by home.social.
-
Using LLMs to help you write papers doesn’t help you get them published
HT Nik John for sending me this fascinating paper by the editors of Organisational Science. If you’re interested in AI and scholarly publishing, read this paper: https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/10.1287/orsc.2026.ed.v37.n3
The highlight for me was the finding
A clear pattern emerges above 30% AI use. Manuscripts crossing this threshold have desk rejection rates nearly 30 percentage points higher than those below it, a 60%–80% relative increase. By the end of the editorial funnel, only 3.2% of high-AI papers (70%+ AI) receive Revise & Resubmit decisions, compared with over three times that rate among low-AI submissions. In other words, editors, likely without recognizing the writing as AI-generated, consistently judged these manuscripts as lower quality and unworthy of reviewers’ time. Interestingly, submissions in the 15%–30% range show a slight increase in success rates, possibly reflecting a more human-first collaboration mode or differences in authors, topics, and other factors that we cannot disentangle.
This to me feels absolutely key. If this is established across multiple domains it becomes the foundation for a renewed normativity about LLM use. The incentives for individual acceleration are real, the rewards for it are not. Going faster with LLMs doesn’t produce the outcomes you’re actually looking for. It also generates a whole range of externalities that make your working life less pleasant, as well as everyone else’s.
#acceleratedAcademy #acceleration #AI #scholarlyPublishing #writing -
Using LLMs to help you write papers doesn’t help you get them published
HT Nik John for sending me this fascinating paper by the editors of Organisational Science. If you’re interested in AI and scholarly publishing, read this paper: https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/10.1287/orsc.2026.ed.v37.n3
The highlight for me was the finding about editorial outcomes:
A clear pattern emerges above 30% AI use. Manuscripts crossing this threshold have desk rejection rates nearly 30 percentage points higher than those below it, a 60%–80% relative increase. By the end of the editorial funnel, only 3.2% of high-AI papers (70%+ AI) receive Revise & Resubmit decisions, compared with over three times that rate among low-AI submissions. In other words, editors, likely without recognizing the writing as AI-generated, consistently judged these manuscripts as lower quality and unworthy of reviewers’ time. Interestingly, submissions in the 15%–30% range show a slight increase in success rates, possibly reflecting a more human-first collaboration mode or differences in authors, topics, and other factors that we cannot disentangle.
This to me feels absolutely key. If this is established across multiple domains it becomes the foundation for a renewed normativity about LLM use. The incentives for individual acceleration are real, the rewards for it are not. Going faster with LLMs doesn’t produce the outcomes you’re actually looking for. It also generates a whole range of externalities that make your working life less pleasant, as well as everyone else’s.
#acceleratedAcademy #acceleration #AI #scholarlyPublishing #writing -
Using LLMs to help you write papers doesn’t help you get them published
HT Nik John for sending me this fascinating paper by the editors of Organisational Science. If you’re interested in AI and scholarly publishing, read this paper: https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/10.1287/orsc.2026.ed.v37.n3
The highlight for me was the finding about editorial outcomes:
A clear pattern emerges above 30% AI use. Manuscripts crossing this threshold have desk rejection rates nearly 30 percentage points higher than those below it, a 60%–80% relative increase. By the end of the editorial funnel, only 3.2% of high-AI papers (70%+ AI) receive Revise & Resubmit decisions, compared with over three times that rate among low-AI submissions. In other words, editors, likely without recognizing the writing as AI-generated, consistently judged these manuscripts as lower quality and unworthy of reviewers’ time. Interestingly, submissions in the 15%–30% range show a slight increase in success rates, possibly reflecting a more human-first collaboration mode or differences in authors, topics, and other factors that we cannot disentangle.
This to me feels absolutely key. If this is established across multiple domains it becomes the foundation for a renewed normativity about LLM use. The incentives for individual acceleration are real, the rewards for it are not. Going faster with LLMs doesn’t produce the outcomes you’re actually looking for. It also generates a whole range of externalities that make your working life less pleasant, as well as everyone else’s.
#acceleratedAcademy #acceleration #AI #scholarlyPublishing #writing -
Using LLMs to help you write papers doesn’t help you get them published
HT Nik John for sending me this fascinating paper by the editors of Organisational Science. If you’re interested in AI and scholarly publishing, read this paper: https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/10.1287/orsc.2026.ed.v37.n3
The highlight for me was the finding about editorial outcomes:
A clear pattern emerges above 30% AI use. Manuscripts crossing this threshold have desk rejection rates nearly 30 percentage points higher than those below it, a 60%–80% relative increase. By the end of the editorial funnel, only 3.2% of high-AI papers (70%+ AI) receive Revise & Resubmit decisions, compared with over three times that rate among low-AI submissions. In other words, editors, likely without recognizing the writing as AI-generated, consistently judged these manuscripts as lower quality and unworthy of reviewers’ time. Interestingly, submissions in the 15%–30% range show a slight increase in success rates, possibly reflecting a more human-first collaboration mode or differences in authors, topics, and other factors that we cannot disentangle.
This to me feels absolutely key. If this is established across multiple domains it becomes the foundation for a renewed normativity about LLM use. The incentives for individual acceleration are real, the rewards for it are not. Going faster with LLMs doesn’t produce the outcomes you’re actually looking for. It also generates a whole range of externalities that make your working life less pleasant, as well as everyone else’s.
#acceleratedAcademy #acceleration #AI #scholarlyPublishing #writing -
Using LLMs to help you write papers doesn’t help you get them published
HT Nik John for sending me this fascinating paper by the editors of Organisational Science. If you’re interested in AI and scholarly publishing, read this paper: https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/10.1287/orsc.2026.ed.v37.n3
The highlight for me was the finding about editorial outcomes:
A clear pattern emerges above 30% AI use. Manuscripts crossing this threshold have desk rejection rates nearly 30 percentage points higher than those below it, a 60%–80% relative increase. By the end of the editorial funnel, only 3.2% of high-AI papers (70%+ AI) receive Revise & Resubmit decisions, compared with over three times that rate among low-AI submissions. In other words, editors, likely without recognizing the writing as AI-generated, consistently judged these manuscripts as lower quality and unworthy of reviewers’ time. Interestingly, submissions in the 15%–30% range show a slight increase in success rates, possibly reflecting a more human-first collaboration mode or differences in authors, topics, and other factors that we cannot disentangle.
This to me feels absolutely key. If this is established across multiple domains it becomes the foundation for a renewed normativity about LLM use. The incentives for individual acceleration are real, the rewards for it are not. Going faster with LLMs doesn’t produce the outcomes you’re actually looking for. It also generates a whole range of externalities that make your working life less pleasant, as well as everyone else’s.
#acceleratedAcademy #acceleration #AI #scholarlyPublishing #writing -
The list of Diamond OA Journals that applied for the #CoDOA funding scheme is now online 💎
-
Dartmouth College: New Guidelines Created for Publishing Indigenous Data. “To ensure that Indigenous peoples’ rights and knowledge are recognized in scientific data and scholarly publishing, a team of Indigenous scholars led by Lydia Jennings, an assistant professor of environmental studies, has established Guidelines for the Governance of Indigenous Peoples’ Data in Scholarly Publishing.”
https://rbfirehose.com/2026/09/09/dartmouth-college-new-guidelines-created-for-publishing-indigenous-data/ -
Dartmouth College: New Guidelines Created for Publishing Indigenous Data. “To ensure that Indigenous peoples’ rights and knowledge are recognized in scientific data and scholarly publishing, a team of Indigenous scholars led by Lydia Jennings, an assistant professor of environmental studies, has established Guidelines for the Governance of Indigenous Peoples’ Data in Scholarly Publishing.”
https://rbfirehose.com/2026/09/09/dartmouth-college-new-guidelines-created-for-publishing-indigenous-data/ -
Dartmouth College: New Guidelines Created for Publishing Indigenous Data. “To ensure that Indigenous peoples’ rights and knowledge are recognized in scientific data and scholarly publishing, a team of Indigenous scholars led by Lydia Jennings, an assistant professor of environmental studies, has established Guidelines for the Governance of Indigenous Peoples’ Data in Scholarly Publishing.”
https://rbfirehose.com/2026/09/09/dartmouth-college-new-guidelines-created-for-publishing-indigenous-data/ -
Dartmouth College: New Guidelines Created for Publishing Indigenous Data. “To ensure that Indigenous peoples’ rights and knowledge are recognized in scientific data and scholarly publishing, a team of Indigenous scholars led by Lydia Jennings, an assistant professor of environmental studies, has established Guidelines for the Governance of Indigenous Peoples’ Data in Scholarly Publishing.”
https://rbfirehose.com/2026/09/09/dartmouth-college-new-guidelines-created-for-publishing-indigenous-data/ -
Dartmouth College: New Guidelines Created for Publishing Indigenous Data. “To ensure that Indigenous peoples’ rights and knowledge are recognized in scientific data and scholarly publishing, a team of Indigenous scholars led by Lydia Jennings, an assistant professor of environmental studies, has established Guidelines for the Governance of Indigenous Peoples’ Data in Scholarly Publishing.”
https://rbfirehose.com/2026/09/09/dartmouth-college-new-guidelines-created-for-publishing-indigenous-data/ -
Oggi siamo all'università di Zadar, in Croazia! 🇭🇷🌊
In occasione della conferenza #pubmet2026 sulla comunicazione nella Scienza Aperta, presenteremo il modello di Milano University Press: una casa editrice accademica Diamond Open Access per una comunicazione scientifica di qualità, al servizio dell'accademia e della società 💎
#OpenAccess #OpenScience #MilanoUniversityPress #UniversitàDegliStudiDiMilano #EditoriaAccademica #DiamondOpenAccess #Ricerca #ScholarlyPublishing
-
Oggi siamo all'università di Zadar, in Croazia! 🇭🇷🌊
In occasione della conferenza #pubmet2026 sulla comunicazione nella Scienza Aperta, presenteremo il modello di Milano University Press: una casa editrice accademica Diamond Open Access per una comunicazione scientifica di qualità, al servizio dell'accademia e della società 💎
#OpenAccess #OpenScience #MilanoUniversityPress #UniversitàDegliStudiDiMilano #EditoriaAccademica #DiamondOpenAccess #Ricerca #ScholarlyPublishing
-
Oggi siamo all'università di Zadar, in Croazia! 🇭🇷🌊
In occasione della conferenza #pubmet2026 sulla comunicazione nella Scienza Aperta, presenteremo il modello di Milano University Press: una casa editrice accademica Diamond Open Access per una comunicazione scientifica di qualità, al servizio dell'accademia e della società 💎
#OpenAccess #OpenScience #MilanoUniversityPress #UniversitàDegliStudiDiMilano #EditoriaAccademica #DiamondOpenAccess #Ricerca #ScholarlyPublishing
-
Oggi siamo all'università di Zadar, in Croazia! 🇭🇷🌊
In occasione della conferenza #pubmet2026 sulla comunicazione nella Scienza Aperta, presenteremo il modello di Milano University Press: una casa editrice accademica Diamond Open Access per una comunicazione scientifica di qualità, al servizio dell'accademia e della società 💎
#OpenAccess #OpenScience #MilanoUniversityPress #UniversitàDegliStudiDiMilano #EditoriaAccademica #DiamondOpenAccess #Ricerca #ScholarlyPublishing
-
Oggi siamo all'università di Zadar, in Croazia! 🇭🇷🌊
In occasione della conferenza #pubmet2026 sulla comunicazione nella Scienza Aperta, presenteremo il modello di Milano University Press: una casa editrice accademica Diamond Open Access per una comunicazione scientifica di qualità, al servizio dell'accademia e della società 💎
#OpenAccess #OpenScience #MilanoUniversityPress #UniversitàDegliStudiDiMilano #EditoriaAccademica #DiamondOpenAccess #Ricerca #ScholarlyPublishing
-
Carbon Brief: Introducing Project Cosmos: Carbon Brief’s ‘universe’ of climate science. “Carbon Brief’s Project Cosmos is a major collaborative effort to build the world’s largest and most complete database of climate change research. The Cosmos database – which features more than 1.8m individual publications linked by 40m citation relationships – captures the vast body of human […]
https://rbfirehose.com/2026/06/23/introducing-project-cosmos-carbon-briefs-universe-of-climate-science-carbon-brief/ -
We are proud to announce that our Managing Editor Dr. Barbara Hissa @BarbaraHissa has been appointed as an advocate for the European Diamond Capacity Hub (#EDCH).
➡️ https://www.beilstein-journals.org/bjnano/news/GUQT3IV6KTESMVC4Y2TP3M4IU4/?M=y
#DiamondOA #OpenAccess #OpenScience #Communitybuilding #ScholarlyPublishing #BJNANO 💎🔓
-
📢 Join a growing number of academics looking to transform their PhDs into publications.
Republish Academic Press specialises in supporting scholars looking to make an impact in their industry. Publish factually faster and fairer.
#AcademicPress #Republish #PhDtoPublication #ScholarlyPublishing #PhDPublishing #Publishing #PhDlife #phdstudent #Academia #Student #University #AcademicCommunity
-
From PhD to Publication ... to vlog?
Transforming chapters into multimedia content like YouTube videos and podcasts can be a fantastic way to make your research more accessible, engaging, and impactful.Read more about how we are reimaging academic publication: https://www.republish.uk/insights
#AcademicPress #Republish #PhDtoPublication #ScholarlyPublishing #PhDPublishing #Publishing #AcademicPodcast #ResearchImpact #PhDResearch #Podcast #Learning #Outreach #Insights
-
Peer-Reviewed, Professional Publishing without the wait?
Our latest book was transformed from a PhD to a publication in just 3 months!Read more: https://www.republish.uk/insights
#AcademicPress #Republish #PhDtoPublication #ScholarlyPublishing #PhDPublishing #Publishing #OpenAccess #ResearchImpact #PeerReview #ThoughtLeadership #PhDone #PhDwriting
-
✍️ Control how and when your work is shared with the world by using our bespoke publishing and promotional services.
Ready to get started … fill out a simple proposal form today and connect with our editorial team: https://www.republish.uk/services/republish-academic-press
#AcademicPress #Republish #PhDtoPublication #ScholarlyPublishing #PhDPublishing #Publishing
-
🤔 Wondering how to make your PhD research more engaging. Publishing your thesis as a book can be the first step in having an impact both within and beyond academia.
Read why we think publishing should be the natural next step after PhD completion: https://www.republish.uk/insights
#AcademicPress #Republish #PhDtoPublication #ScholarlyPublishing #PhDPublishing #Publishing
-
Peer review is a cornerstone of academic publishing and research quality assurance. Our latest insight breaks down the difference between the 7 most common...
https://www.republish.uk/insights#AcademicPress #Republish #PhDtoPublication #ScholarlyPublishing #PhDPublishing #Publishing #PeerReview
-
📢 Limited 2025 production slots available
Submit your proposal today and talk with our team. No upfront costs, just proactive publishing for PhD students.Email info@republish or visit our website https://buff.ly/5rStlPn
#AcademicPress #Republish #PhDtoPublication #PostPhD #AcademicPress #ScholarlyPublishing #AcademicWriting #OpenAccess #PeerReview #AcademicLife #PhDWriting #PhDone #PhDResearch #EarlyCareerResearcher #PhDCareer #ResearchImpact
-
My panel this morning at the European Association of Science Editors (@EASE) conference in Oslo was on the use of new tech in research integrity checks, alongside Caroline Sutton in person and Kim Eggleton and Jane Alfred online.
Our conversation was great (if I say so myself), helped by the chairing by Brian Cody. I thought it would be interesting to see how others here would answer Brian's questions:
1. What are the top research integrity concerns for scholarly publishers, and how much are they discipline-specific?
2. Technical checks can be overwhelming for journals. How to manage manuscript checklists from a process perspective?
3. How do publishers considering new automation / tools decide what's necessary vs nice to have?
4. Case studies of implementing tools.
5. Many tools only apply to English publications. What tools should non-English journals know about?
6. How can publishers and editors get involved in tool development?
7. What is the potential for AI to improve research integrity checks vs human oversight?
#ResearchIntegrity #PublicationEthics #AItools #Automation #EASEevents #EASEoslo #PaperMills #ScholarlyPublishing #ScholComm
-
@bahar and Mario Malički have just published their structured peer review checklist in European Science Editing. lt helps researchers to ensure they provide thorough and constructive feedback for each section of a manuscript they review. They also suggest how journal editors and publishers can leverage the checklist throughout their peer review process.
https://ese.arphahub.com/article/137675/
#PeerReview #JournalEditing #EuropeanScienceEditing #AcademicPublishing #ScholarlyPublishing #Checklists #Elsevier
-
Artificial intelligence and digital technology may revolutionize peer review and publishing by addressing limitations and fostering collaboration among scholars worldwide. In European Science Editing, Dikran Toroser, Muhammad Sarwar, Lisa DeTora, Laura Dormer, and Maryam Sayab address how academics, policymakers, and the publishing industry can work together to develop ethical, effective #AItools and #DigitalTech.
https://doi.org/10.3897/ese.2023.e116106 -
👍 #Nanopublications = “smallest unit of #publishable information”
🤔 Why should #scientists consider #publishing “pixels of #knowledge”?
🧐 What's in there for #authors & #readers at RIO Journal?
Find more about our pilot project with @knowledgepixels on our blog: https://blog.pensoft.net/2023/05/17/how-it-works-nanopublications-linked-to-articles-in-rio-journal/
#openscience #openresearch #scholarlypublishing #journals #research #researchers #researchpaper #scientificresearch #scientists #scientificpaper #nanopubs #scholcomm
-
🧐 Everything you can do with #nanopublications in our #RIOJournal on #Pensoft's blog👇
Our #nanopub pilot project with @knowledgepixels gives our authors & readers several opportunities to use #nanopubs to contribute to #published knowledge in a #FAIR manner.
https://blog.pensoft.net/2023/05/17/how-it-works-nanopublications-linked-to-articles-in-rio-journal/
#openscience #openresearch #scholarlypublishing #journals #research #researchers #researchpaper #scientificresearch #scientists #scientificpaper #nanopubs #scholcomm