Online su Darwin
Nuove edizioni digitali online / 5 settembre
, September 5, 2011

Sono online due nuovi titoli; si tratta dei libri di Umberto Levra e Francesco Vella.

Ebook sì, no, forse
, August 24, 2011

What are the deeper implications of the shift to ebooks – for us

Let’s forget Publishers … and Authors … and all the companies that want to take over Publishing and Books. That leaves us readers and our books.

We are migrating from books to ebooks and from a curated gatekeeper model to a mix of curation and long tail and ‘anyone can publish’.

What impact does it have on us?



Dopo GScholar, Citations?
, August 22, 2011

All Things Google: Google Scholar Citations

It’s no great secret that many of us here at ProfHacker are heavy users of All Things Google. One of the services I particularly like is Google Scholar; I find it a good starting point for literature searches, and appreciate the ability to set up alerts. Plus, Zoteroworks very well with it.

A few weeks ago, Google introduced a service that should make Scholar even more useful: Google Scholar Citations.

[Da The Chronicle of Higer Education]

Ancora sui digital textbooks
, August 18, 2011

Digital textbooks will save you money and other nonsense

A few weeks back Amazon announced their digital textbook rental program. You can probably recall how many bloggers wrote about how this new program would save students so much money...

[da the Digital Reader]

Peer review e open data
, August 17, 2011

Will Open Data Solve Peer Review Concerns?

The report, “Peer Review in Scientific Publications,” released last week by the U.K. House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, reiterates much of what we already know:

  • That peer and editorial review is important for maintaining the integrity of the scientific literature
  • That the process of peer review is not consistent across all journals
  • That pre-publication review may be supplemented — although not replaced — by post-publication review
  • That publishers need to continue experimenting with other models for review and dissemination
  • That editors and senior academics need to educate new scholars on how to provide quality reviews
  • That granting and promotion committees should not rely upon a single metric (e.g., the impact factor) in order to evaluate the merits of a paper
[da the Scholarly Kitchen]