Not just AI. I wrote about this way back in 2014 scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2014/08/15/i...

Best wishes and holiday cheer to our amazing G&D community...

Hibernating Until Next Year - The Scholarly Kitchen

Since it's a tense time of year 🫠

Giving the gift of negative data 🥰 Since I joined @lsajournal.org I have handled several stellar manuscripts that report null results. These papers do very well and reviewers almost always appreciate them! Thanks @rockefeller.edu news team for the article! www.rockefeller.edu/news/38829-t...

"in-house editors...undoubtedly have biases, as all humans do, but they aren’t reliant on getting a good grant review from authors whose work they assess" Those who attack professional editors rarely acknowledge that the big COI for academic editors 1/2 newsletter.journalology.com/p/journalolo...

Which should be the most basic expectation of a citation and yet.

Sigh. What is up with the continued referring to the “big five” publishers that ignores the commercial power players in the market like MDPI in favor of Sage which hasn’t been in the top five for ages? www.researchinformation.info/news/jisc-se...

As everyone knows who has ever written a book or manuscript review, summarizing a text is essential work. It’s the first step of an analysis. If you haven’t summarized the text there is no way I believe that you have understood it.

a big part of the issue surrounding the use of chatgpt/LLMs in academic research comes down to process vs. product. a lot of us know that the process of doing research matters because that's where intellectual work is done; but some "academics" and lots of techies only care about a fast product

Thanks to those who support CSH Perpectives in Biology, whose contents are published online in the journal and are also offered in print. I'm an editor at the journal and I'm always looking for ideas for collections, so if you have one, please let me know!

The updated Periodic Table explaining the elements to 2025 people who don't understand science

Adding immediately www.wired.com/story/chrome...

A few things still emerging from my C&E days, including today's issue of @brieferyet.bsky.social AI in peer review, the AI-ification of all things Google (including Scholar), the OAwakening of cOAlition S and the current state of the post–Twitter academic social media fragmentation.

An annual tradition…

Research groups are pushing back on NIH’s proposal to cap grant funding for publication costs, warning that flat caps oversimplify the real costs of trusted scholarly publishing. 🔗 www.insidehighered.com/news/governm... #ScholComm #ScholarlyPublishing #OpenAccess #Funding

More than a few people in scientific publishing appear to have never actually read a scientific paper for content. And others appear not to understand that the main reason we write papers is to have them read… by other humans.

In my case, this painstaking labor in the process through which the science gets done. Science isn't measuring stuff in a lab. It's thinking deeply, extracting the heart of idea from the soup of thoughts running through my mind, molding it, and finding a way to communicate that idea to others.

I think it would be most helpful to (1) completely revise the #peer #review system and to (2) find a way to deal with the problems that commenter @dacrotty.bsky.social mentions in the @scholarlykitchen.bsky.social blog post.

Editors are ultimately responsible for what gets accepted and published. Not reviewers. Not authors.

Agreed: The Illustrated Children’s Book I’ll Never Stop Recommending to Adults www.nytimes.com/2025/12/09/m...

The question is not “Times New Roman” (boring) or “Calibri” (also boring). The real question goes like this: why are you all not using “Garamond”? #TeamGaramond

As of December 10th, 2025, the arXiv Mathematics section will no longer accept institutional email addresses (i.e., an email address associated with an academic or research institution) as the sole qualifier for an automatic endorsement for new authors. blog.arxiv.org/2025/12/10/u...

Revised Definitions of the Verb “To Google”: supposed to be SATIRE but eg, "To look something up quickly and then spend twenty minutes fact-checking the AI summary, only to find out that it was absolutely wrong." That's just reality now. www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/rev...

The way tech companies constantly do stuff that nobody asked for really tells you a lot about their bigger ideology. They tell themselves that you will like it over time. What they mean is you’ll learn to endure it, or you’ll give up. quality of UI is not actually anywhere on their radar

The opening keynote at #STMInnovation, Rachel Gubermann-Hill of U Bristol and UKCORI says there's no real evidence that the public doesn't trust scientists Here's the key article she recomended: doi.org/10.1038/s415...

A lot of #scholcomm #publishing startups focus on using #AI to detect bad manuscripts at the point of review. Publishing is a late stage step in the scholalry supply change. Trying to detect what has happened at each upstream step is a fool's errand. The whole chain needs hardening #STMinnovation

G&D Executive Editor, Dr. Eric Sawey is at #cellbio2025! If you’d like to share your work with us or learn about the journal, drop by the CSHL Press booth or reach out at [email protected] #genesdev Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

A new issue of CSH Protocols is out! The cover image highlights the work by Marshall et al., who describe a detailed protocol for performing multicolor flip-out (MCFO) in Drosophila larvae. ⬇️Links below

Happy 76th Birthday, Tom Waits!

Everyone knows the distinctive curves and lines of Frank Gehry’s buildings. But where do they come from? Gehry, who died this week at 96, described drawing as his way of “thinking aloud.”

#LivingArchitectures We put cells and cytoskeleton filaments on the architecture of the musée d'Orsay. www.musee-orsay.fr/fr/agenda/ev... Scientists of the #CytoMorphoLab adapted their protocols to illustrate the questions that keep them awake at night. -> Two shows on the 24th and 25th of January.

Wow.... Incredible close-up of spider silk wins science photo prize www.newscientist.com/article/2506...

The @nytimes.com breaks down how recent policy changes are reshaping the landscape in ways that extend far beyond agency budgets. #ScholComm #AcademicPublishing #ResearchFunding #SciencePolicy www.nytimes.com/interactive/...

SocArXiv announces moratorium on AI-topic papers

It's weird to not only have lived through an information revolution but also now living through its undoing, all within less than a generation.

What we did before Google www.instagram.com/reel/DRZ0j5x...

Today in 1988 Mystery Science Theater 3000 premiered on KTMA in St. Paul Minnesota. #MST3K

“Do more for less!” Plus of course “Make things more complicated but easier!”

From @aip-publishing.bsky.social: cost of a peer reviewed article is $2700 (*before* you start giving back to the community). Would like to see a more detailed split, but it does align with estimates from eLife and EMBO #ScientificPublishing www.stm-publishing.com/cost-transpa...

Image screening is going to fail. We need audit trails for data provenance.

Seems like that Gmail thing isn't true but maybe there's a lesson here about what happens when you keep turning new features on by default and you make it difficult or impossible to turn them off, and also what happens when you lump useful machine learning in with forced slop under the "AI" label

I’ve never worked for a journal that charged authors for a cover. Are those paid-for covers labeled as “advertising“?

"If the data is accurate...it would call into question the business model of OpenAI and nearly every other general-purpose LLM vendor" www.ft.com/content/fce7...

Plus: a quick guide to the two-step process for opting out.

Everyone teaching right now sees lots of evidence for this. Students using LLMs are, to varying degrees, incapable of independently doing the things they are supposedly learning, the same way that students copying answers from a solutions manual then struggle to do something similar on an exam.

It’s widely known (and, I think, pretty uncontroversial) that learning requires effort — specifically, if you don’t have to work at getting the knowledge, it won’t stick. Even if an LLM could be trusted to give you correct information 100% of the time, it would be an inferior method of learning it.

Easily the best album ever with the title “Let it Be” The moment it all clicked for the Replacements — before it fell apart wapo.st/3LWw0pm

This is true in theory, but decades later self-archiving hasn't exactly won hearts and minds either. It's almost like running a profitable business and using those profits to pay professionals to do their job is worthwhile when it comes to dissemination of scholarly work.