🌐 In our new blog post, Juan Pablo Bascur introduces the ORION Dashboard: a tool that makes #openresearchdata accessible, interactive, and easy to explore 👩‍💻. 🔎 Discover the blog post here 👉 www.leidenmadtrics.nl/articles/ori...

ORION dashboard: bringing open research data within reach

The ORION dashboard enables easy exploration of CWTS OpenAlex data on BigQuery, letting users analyse institutions, funders, and research topics via interactive visualisations and reproducible SQL que...

leidenmadtrics.nl

I have literally watched something like 5 hours of this DOGE bro testimony. I'm completely obsessed, it's weirdly captivating. The circular arguments, the disdain from everyone involved, a true pleasure to watch Follow 404 Media on Instagram (www.instagram.com/404mediaco/) for more like this

"Funders serious about timely, open, and equitable access to research must explicitly recognize preprint sharing as a route to Open Access compliance" I know I'm a broken record on this but it seems so blindingly obvious... #PlanU journals.plos.org/plosbiology/... council.science/blog/open-sc...

Open Science round-up: Making preprints count - International Science Council

In this issue, we feature an editorial by the International Network for Advancing Science and Policy (INASP) on how funders and policy-makers can support a faster, more equitable publishing system by ...

council.science

If you enjoyed the first edition, get ready for the 2nd Canadian Open Science Conference!!🍁 #savethedate : 27-29 October, @uottawa.ca more info and CfA coming soon ! sign up for the mailing list, you don't want to miss it 💫 #AcademicSky #OpenScience #ScholComm @stefhaustein.scholcommlab.ca

🔓 Our latest article presents an analysis of bronze open access publications in the Web of Science database. Reviewers did not identify major weaknesses, calling it solid, timely & sound, and suggested expanding the discussion on the concept of bronze OA. 👇 Read the full evaluation now on MetaROR

The State of Bronze Open Access in Web of Science - MetaROR

metaror.org

In support of #OpenScience, we routinely ask authors to openly share their #research #code before publication. We are now formalizing this practice with a mandatory #CodeSharing policy and clarifying what we mean by code sharing.

Formalizing our commitment to code sharing

In support of open science, PLOS Biology routinely asks authors to openly share their research code before publication. We are now formalizing this practice with a mandatory code sharing policy and…

plos.io

Can temporary pop-up journals (designed to answer one specific research question) become popular among researchers? My latest for @nature.com: www.nature.com/articles/d41... @mattsclancy.bsky.social, @stefhaustein.scholcommlab.ca

Pop-up journals for policy research: can temporary titles deliver answers?

Journals that focus on specific research questions could help to bridge the science–policy gap, if they can attract researchers.

nature.com

Think of all the money research funders have poured into the maw of the Big Five publishers, paying for APCs instead of funding diamond #openaccess infrastructure, what a shame! scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2026/02/18/g... "Open access needs institutions not heroes"

Guest Post — Diamond Open Access Needs Institutions, Not Heroes - The Scholarly Kitchen

Today's guest blogger asks: What would it mean to support community-led publishing as infrastructure, rather than as a collection of heroic individual efforts?

scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org

Last year, the KB presented the initial OPENBIB data release, which contains selected and curated metadata from OpenAlex. See this new blog post tinyurl.com/58zmb79z for an updated data release based on the OAL snapshot from July 25. This data release also features a KB author disambiguation system.

V useful piece dispelling myths about NIH policy on open access upstream.force11.org/cost-of-conf...

The Cost of Confusion: Dispelling Myths about the NIH Public Access Policy and Article Processing Charges

Last July, the NIH issued an RFI on limiting direct spending on article processing charges (APCs). Over 900 public responses offered valuable perspectives but also exposed widespread misconceptions ab...

upstream.force11.org

🟢 Trump secoue les publis Intimidations, voire fermeture de certaines revues, coupure d’abonnements, volonté de limiter les frais de publication... On fait le bilan d'un an de Donald Trump au pouvoir themeta.news/ledition-sci... #VeilleESR @stefhaustein.scholcommlab.ca

"By far the most common misconception appearing in the RFI responses is that NIH public access policy has essentially forced researchers into a "pay-to-play" system" Christopher Steven Marcum and Corinna Turbes on some of the misconceptions about the NIH Public Access Policy.

The Cost of Confusion: Dispelling Myths about the NIH Public Access Policy and Article Processing Charges

Last July, the NIH issued an RFI on limiting direct spending on article processing charges (APCs). Over 900 public responses offered valuable perspectives but also exposed widespread misconceptions ab...

upstream.force11.org

"Relx, which is the 16th largest company in the FTSE 100 index, lost just over £6 billion from its stock market value after Anthropic launched a new AI product that can help automate work for the legal industry." archive.ph/ya78V

All set for New Horizons 💎 #OpenAccess in Nijmegen! Thank you to the organisers for the opportunity to speak on the Strain, Stain, & Drain of scientific publishing. Looking forward to great conversations on moving #ScientificPublishing forward! bit.ly/StrainQSS www.horizondiamond.nl#schedule

OK, day off, but I wanted to share this: codeberg.org/gbilder/inst... "Instead" is an intriguing proposal by the super-smart @gbilder.com to give AI bots a pointer to a prepackaged downloadable static version of a site. Bear with me, as I know this sounds bad at first glance.

instead

Old draft idea for encouraging AI bots to behave when scraping open infrastructure

codeberg.org

📣 Our introduction to structural causal models in science studies is now published: doi.org/10.1162/QSS.... @tklebel.bsky.social and I tried to make our introduction as accessible as possible. We illustrate the theory by three case studies based on a simulated model of Open Science. 🧵(1/6)

New resource: a practical guide to publication and cost monitoring through institutional #OpenAccess repositories. English summary: doi.org/10.59350/rhe... #OpenScience @ibi-hu.bsky.social, @humboldtuni.bsky.social

NOR US! Another three UK universities decline new Elsevier deal www.timeshighereducation.com/news/three-m... - Sheffield, Lancaster and Surrey confirm they are walking away from proposed three-year deal with world’s largest academic publisher. (paywalled sorry)

Another three UK universities decline new Elsevier deal

Sheffield, Lancaster and Surrey confirm they are walking away from proposed three-year deal with world’s largest academic publisher

timeshighereducation.com

Danny Kingsley@dannykay68.bsky.social · 7mo ago

NUP! Three major research universities opt out of new Elsevier deal - Complaints over ‘price increases’ and open access models spur UK institutions to walk away from offer... (paywalled sorry) - Unis of Kent, Essex and Sussex www.timeshighereducation.com/news/three-m...

Thousands of scientists inflate their CVs with self-published studies that cost millions of dollars of public money 1 in 8 'special issues' is filled with articles written by the editor, particularly at the publisher MDPI @manuelansede.bsky.social english.elpais.com/science-tech...

Thousands of scientists inflate their CVs with self-published studies that cost millions of dollars of public money

An analysis of 100,000 special issues of academic journals reveals that one in eight is filled with articles written by the editor, particularly at the publisher MDPI

english.elpais.com

“We have to find significant non-pay budget savings so this was the obvious place to start,” www.timeshighereducation.com/news/three-m...

Three major research universities opt out of new Elsevier deal

Complaints over ‘price increases’ and open access models spur UK institutions to walk away from offer from publishing giant, despite nationally negotiated agreement

timeshighereducation.com

Given all the news about ICE in the past few weeks, can I kindly remind you all that RELX (owners of Elsevier & LexisNexis) is "mission-critical" to ICE. ICE pays RELX Group and Thomson Reuters millions of dollars for the personal data it needs to fuel its big data policing program […]

@cometadata.bsky.social has been demonstrating it's possible to do big things! Matched over ~400K preprints 1/ ~2 MILLION authors to RORs—now in an openly available dataset. Come learn what we've been up to, what's next, and how to get involved. Next community call next week. Details below.

COMET@cometadata.bsky.social · 7mo ago

1.9 million author entries. 2.1 million affiliation entries. 1.75 million matched to ROR IDs. That's what our fine-tuned open-weight model extracted from 430,000 arXiv preprints. Join us on 21 Jan to discuss the results. 📅 Register: datacite.zoom.us/meeting/regi...

In Scientific #Publishing, Who Should Foot the Bill? undark.org/2026/01/07/a... (via @undark.org) #scholcomm #libraries @juancommander.scholcommlab.ca @stefhaustein.scholcommlab.ca

'And according to @eschares.bsky.social, data suggest that APCs bear almost no relation to publishing expenses. “So that tells me that APCs are not set on really what it costs to produce an article there,” he said. “It’s more prestige.”' Undark piece on who should pay for scientific publishing.

In Scientific Publishing, Who Should Foot the Bill?

Publishers often charge authors to publish their publicly-funded research. Will a federal crackdown make a difference?

undark.org

🧪 I ran into this in another list. The title and the abstract of this paper is quite provocative. Table 1 with the profits of the 6 major sci publishing companies is something. arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820

The Drain of Scientific Publishing

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 ...

arxiv.org

Closing out my year with a journal editor shocker 🧵 Checking new manuscripts today I reviewed a paper attributing 2 papers to me I did not write. A daft thing for an author to do of course. But intrigued I web searched up one of the titles and that's when it got real weird...

(Also, icyi, here are the 42 papers citing our non-existent paper which includes a "meta-analysis" - often called the evidence "gold standard" - of "LLM effects" in education 🤮 scholar.google.com.vn/scholar?star...)

OpenAlex intégré au Web of Science, ou la capture du travail des “commoners” | carnetist.hypotheses.org/2572

OpenAlex intégré au Web of Science, ou la capture du travail des “commoners”

C’est une annonce qui est passée relativement inaperçue, mais qui mérite que l’on s’y arrête un instant. Clarivate a récemment annoncé l’intégration d’OpenAlex comme une nouvelle base de données au se...

carnetist.hypotheses.org

"Today, the system rewards commercial publishers first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge". doi.org/10.48550/arX...

Elsevier at its best: they only embrace #openscience when it makes money and does not endanger their assets. Now that Crossref data is CC0 and used by 3rd parties (OpenAlex, Matilda,...), they just keep data in their systems @keanbirch.bsky.social #openresearchinformation @barcelonadori.bsky.social

Najko Jahn@najko.bsky.social · 8mo ago

There seems to be a decrease in the coverage of affiliation metadata in #OpenAlex, particularly with regard to journal articles published by Elsevier since 2024. Only around 6% of Elsevier articles published in 2025 have affiliation metadata. subugoe.github.io/scholcomm_an...