{"id":451,"date":"2018-04-30T13:26:32","date_gmt":"2018-04-30T13:26:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018\/"},"modified":"2025-11-25T13:12:48","modified_gmt":"2025-11-25T07:42:48","slug":"academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018","title":{"rendered":"Academic publishing and scholarly communications: Good reads, April 2018"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;\"><span style=\"font-size: 11pt;\"><span style=\"line-height: 115%;\"><span style=\"font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;\">Do you know what\u00a0the scholarly community was talking about\u00a0this month?\u00a0Here&#8217;s\u00a0a curated list of the some\u00a0thought-provoking posts that got the\u00a0scholarly publishing talking in\u00a0the month of April. In addition to\u00a0trending discussions on \u201czombie\u201d papers, depression among researchers, fake acceptance letters from journals, and how competition and \u201cNobel lust\u201d affects researchers\u2019 choices, there were several interesting opinion exchanges among the academics. \u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;\"><span style=\"font-size: 11pt;\"><span style=\"line-height: 115%;\"><span style=\"font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;\"><b>1. Zombie papers and how to slay them for good:<\/b> If you are a fan of Zombie movies, you&#8217;d know that zombies are neither alive nor dead. Did you know that the zombie concept has also made its way into academia?\u00a0&#8220;<a style=\"color: blue; text-decoration: underline;\" href=\"https:\/\/theresearchwhisperer.wordpress.com\/2018\/04\/17\/slaying-zombie-papers\/\">Zombie research papers<\/a>&#8221; are those\u00a0that researchers begin working on but which never make it to completion or publication. In this interesting post, Dr. Jonathan Downie, a practicing conference interpreter, takes up this interesting phenomenon and tries to understand why zombie papers exist in the first place\u00a0&#8212; sometimes\u00a0researchers get distracted, they give up a specific approach because another angle could increase their chances of acceptance, they find it difficult to convert an 80,000 word thesis into an 8000 word research paper, and so on. The bigger problem, however, is that researchers unwittingly allow these unfinished papers to &#8220;go zombie&#8221; and reduce the likelihood of critical scientific breakthroughs being made. Dr. Downnie goes on to share some useful tips for researchers to help them ensure that they complete what they started out with and avoid letting their papers go zombie.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;\"><span style=\"font-size: 11pt;\"><span style=\"line-height: 115%;\"><span style=\"font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;\"><b>2. What reviewers should look out for in a paper:<\/b> According to Stuart Cantrill, Chief Editor at <em>Nature Chemistry<\/em>; Rob Eagling, Editor-in-Chief of <em>Chem<\/em>; Fiona Hutton, Publisher at Cambridge University Press; and Robert Baker, Assistant Professor in inorganic and materials chemistry at Trinity College Dublin, Ireland, and associate editor at <em>RSC Advances<\/em>, there are <a style=\"color: blue; text-decoration: underline;\" href=\"https:\/\/www.chemistryworld.com\/careers\/the-ethics-of-scientific-publishing\/3008851.article\">certain aspects that reviewers should be aware of<\/a><a href=\"http:\/\/www.chemistryworld.com\/careers\/the-ethics-of-scientific-publishing\/3008851.article\">\u00a0or look out for<\/a> when assessing a manuscript, such as plagiarism and data fabrication. Despite the availability of tools to detect these unethical practices, they feel that human intervention plays an important role. This is because\u00a0several situations demand a judgment call by the reviewers and journal editor\u00a0to identify whether or not\u00a0authors have\u00a0indeed committed misconduct. They also advise reviewers against sharing\u00a0manuscripts under review with anyone. &#8220;Many professors use peer review to train postdocs and grad students,&#8221; but this should be avoided and the journal editor should always be informed if sharing an unpublished paper is required for any reason. Finally, the authors of this post believe that reviewers have a crucial role to play in maintaining the credibility of science and should play their part to ensure that all published literature is free of flaws.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;\"><span style=\"font-size: 11pt;\"><span style=\"line-height: 115%;\"><span style=\"font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;\"><b>3. What should researchers do when they are depressed?<\/b> In <a style=\"color: blue; text-decoration: underline;\" href=\"http:\/\/www.sciencemag.org\/careers\/2018\/04\/mental-health-academia-too-often-forgotten-footnote-needs-change\">this post<\/a>, researcher Arnav Chhabra talks about some difficult times he faced during his PhD, which led him to enter a depressed mental state. After struggling with serious academic and personal problems, Chhabra finally decided to consult a therapist but not without doubts of how successful this approach would be. The therapy helped him cope with his situation and improved his self-confidence. Chhabra talks about how it is difficult being a researcher and how it is even more difficult for a researcher to identify the signs of depression and seek out help. Chhabra makes a strong case: &#8220;Studies have shown that 40% of Ph.D. students are depressed. But if it weren\u2019t for my own experiences, I would not be aware of this\u2014and therein lies the problem. Academics tend to be averse to discussing mental health openly&#8230;.&#8221; By sharing a personal experience Chhabra hopes to encourage other PhD students to follow suit and seek out help when they need it most.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;\"><span style=\"font-size: 11pt;\"><span style=\"line-height: 115%;\"><span style=\"font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;\"><b>4. Are you sure the acceptance letter you received is authentic? <\/b>Angela Cochran, Associate Publisher and Journals Director for the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), says the ASCE has <a style=\"color: blue; text-decoration: underline;\" href=\"https:\/\/scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org\/2018\/04\/18\/paper-acceptedunless-letter-forged\/\">uncovered a new scam<\/a> wherein unscrupulous organizations and individuals are corresponding with authors and sending them fake acceptance letters on behalf of ASCE journals. She mentions seven incidents that involved authors being sent an acceptance letter, or being promised publication in a particular month, and even being duped by someone who claimed to be the editor&#8217;s friend and would help the paper get published in exchange for money. Two of the authors who fell prey to this scam\u00a0were from Iran\u00a0while the rest were from China. Cochran suspects more such cases and believes that probably authors from non-English speaking countries place more trust in people who claim to help them wade through the complex journal publishing process. She feels the need to create more awareness both among journals and authors about these malpractices.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;\"><span style=\"font-size: 11pt;\"><span style=\"line-height: 115%;\"><span style=\"font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;\"><b>5. Competition in science and the \u201cNobel lust\u201d:<\/b>\u00a0This is\u00a0<a style=\"color: blue; text-decoration: underline;\" href=\"https:\/\/www.nature.com\/articles\/d41586-018-04535-0\">an interesting article<\/a>\u00a0by Rob Cowen that talks about Brian Keating&#8217;s recently published book &#8220;<a style=\"color: blue; text-decoration: underline;\" href=\"http:\/\/books.wwnorton.com\/books\/losing-the-nobel-prize\/\">Losing the Nobel Prize: A Story of Cosmology, Ambition, and the Perils of Science\u2019s Highest Honor<\/a>.&#8221; Brian Keating, a professor of physics at the University of California, San Diego, and\u00a0a Fellow of the American Physical Society, was part of the team that announced the groundbreaking discovery about the detection of gravitational waves. In the book, Keating takes the reader through his journey from making the announcement about these findings to them turning\u00a0out to be inaccurate. He draws from his personal experience and speaks of how &#8220;Nobel lust&#8221; and the fear of being scooped affected their team&#8217;s\u00a0choices and how they affects researchers in general. Highlighting the loopholes in the Nobel Prize, Keating says the prize prevents researchers from thinking out of the box and does not recognize the changing research landscape.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;\"><span style=\"font-size: 11pt;\"><span style=\"line-height: 115%;\"><span style=\"font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;\"><b>6. Researcher&#8217;s trials involving children suspended indefinitely for suspected malpractice:<\/b> The work of Mani Pavuluri&#8211;an accomplished psychiatrist famous for her work on potential treatments for bipolar disorderat the University of Illinois at Chicago\u00a0and founder of a clinic that helps treat children with bipolar disorder&#8211;has come under close scrutiny following <a style=\"color: blue; text-decoration: underline;\" href=\"https:\/\/www.propublica.org\/article\/university-of-illinois-chicago-mani-pavuluri-3-million-research-breakdown\">allegations of violation of clinical trial best practices<\/a>. During the course of her research, Pavuluri\u2019s allegedly placed some of the children that were part of her clinical trials at serious risk. According to this report, &#8220;She violated research rules by testing the powerful drug lithium on children younger than 13 although she was told not to, failed to properly alert parents of the study\u2019s risks and falsified data to cover up the misconduct, records show.&#8221; Among other violations, 86% of the 103 subjects enrolled in her study did not meet the eligibility criteria. Ideally, these violations could have been identified at an early stage, but the university\u2019s institutional review board conducted an &#8220;insufficient&#8221; assessment of the trial&#8217;s proposal. This case has also been discussed at length in <a style=\"color: blue; text-decoration: underline;\" href=\"https:\/\/retractionwatch.com\/2018\/04\/11\/child-psychiatrists-research-was-suspended-indefinitely-following-probe\/\">The Retraction Watch<\/a>. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;\"><span style=\"font-size: 11pt;\"><span style=\"line-height: 115%;\"><span style=\"font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;\">If you like these recommendations, you might also like our previously published\u00a0<b><a style=\"color: blue; text-decoration: underline;\" href=\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/categories\/scholarly-communications-good-reads\">Scholarly Communications Good Reads<\/a><\/b> collections.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;\"><span style=\"font-size: 11pt;\"><span style=\"line-height: 115%;\"><span style=\"font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;\">And if you\u2019d like to stay tuned to important happenings in the journal publishing industry, visit our\u00a0<a style=\"color: blue; text-decoration: underline;\" href=\"http:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/categories\/industry-news\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><b>Industry News<\/b><\/a>\u00a0section.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Do you know what\u00a0the scholarly community was talking about\u00a0this month?\u00a0Here&#8217;s\u00a0a curated list of the some\u00a0thought-provoking posts that got the\u00a0scholarly publishing talking in\u00a0the month of April. In addition to\u00a0trending discussions on \u201czombie\u201d papers, depression among researchers, fake acceptance letters from journals, and how competition and \u201cNobel lust\u201d affects researchers\u2019 choices, there were several interesting opinion exchanges [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":33313,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2382],"tags":[2463],"new_categories":[],"new_tags":[],"series":[],"class_list":["post-451","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-around-the-web","tag-recommended-reading"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v25.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Academic publishing and scholarly communications: Good reads, April 2018 | Editage Insights<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Were you on top of the exciting happenings in the scholarly community in this month? From trending discussions on \u201czombie\u201d papers, depression among researchers, fake acceptance letters from journals, and how competition and \u201cNobel lust\u201d affects researchers\u2019 choices, there were several more interesting opinion exchanges among the academics. Read on for a great curated list of the most engaging and thought-provoking content published in the month of April that our team of editors put together.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Academic publishing and scholarly communications: Good reads, April 2018 | Editage Insights\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Were you on top of the exciting happenings in the scholarly community in this month? From trending discussions on \u201czombie\u201d papers, depression among researchers, fake acceptance letters from journals, and how competition and \u201cNobel lust\u201d affects researchers\u2019 choices, there were several more interesting opinion exchanges among the academics. Read on for a great curated list of the most engaging and thought-provoking content published in the month of April that our team of editors put together.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Editage Insights\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Editage\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-04-30T13:26:32+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-11-25T07:42:48+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/editage-insights-generic-banner.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"870\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"446\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editage Insights\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@Editage\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Editage\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editage Insights\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Editage Insights\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#\/schema\/person\/71ff452a0868e4716ad471b4a1ed6df6\"},\"headline\":\"Academic publishing and scholarly communications: Good reads, April 2018\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-04-30T13:26:32+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-11-25T07:42:48+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018\"},\"wordCount\":1168,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/editage-insights-generic-banner_298.webp\",\"keywords\":[\"Recommended Reading\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Around the web\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018\",\"name\":\"Academic publishing and scholarly communications: Good reads, April 2018 | Editage Insights\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/editage-insights-generic-banner_298.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-04-30T13:26:32+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-11-25T07:42:48+00:00\",\"description\":\"Were you on top of the exciting happenings in the scholarly community in this month? From trending discussions on \u201czombie\u201d papers, depression among researchers, fake acceptance letters from journals, and how competition and \u201cNobel lust\u201d affects researchers\u2019 choices, there were several more interesting opinion exchanges among the academics. Read on for a great curated list of the most engaging and thought-provoking content published in the month of April that our team of editors put together.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/editage-insights-generic-banner_298.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/editage-insights-generic-banner_298.webp\",\"width\":656,\"height\":336},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Academic publishing and scholarly communications: Good reads, April 2018\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/\",\"name\":\"Editage Insights\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Editage Insights\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/editage-insights-logo-1-scaled.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/editage-insights-logo-1-scaled.webp\",\"width\":2560,\"height\":324,\"caption\":\"Editage Insights\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Editage\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Editage\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#\/schema\/person\/71ff452a0868e4716ad471b4a1ed6df6\",\"name\":\"Editage Insights\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9d33a4703576af04935cc28dc48b743638328ea5bb37abe951330e2024defb9e?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9d33a4703576af04935cc28dc48b743638328ea5bb37abe951330e2024defb9e?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editage Insights\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/editage-insights\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Academic publishing and scholarly communications: Good reads, April 2018 | Editage Insights","description":"Were you on top of the exciting happenings in the scholarly community in this month? From trending discussions on \u201czombie\u201d papers, depression among researchers, fake acceptance letters from journals, and how competition and \u201cNobel lust\u201d affects researchers\u2019 choices, there were several more interesting opinion exchanges among the academics. Read on for a great curated list of the most engaging and thought-provoking content published in the month of April that our team of editors put together.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Academic publishing and scholarly communications: Good reads, April 2018 | Editage Insights","og_description":"Were you on top of the exciting happenings in the scholarly community in this month? From trending discussions on \u201czombie\u201d papers, depression among researchers, fake acceptance letters from journals, and how competition and \u201cNobel lust\u201d affects researchers\u2019 choices, there were several more interesting opinion exchanges among the academics. Read on for a great curated list of the most engaging and thought-provoking content published in the month of April that our team of editors put together.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018","og_site_name":"Editage Insights","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Editage","article_published_time":"2018-04-30T13:26:32+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-11-25T07:42:48+00:00","og_image":[{"width":870,"height":446,"url":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/editage-insights-generic-banner.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"Editage Insights","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@Editage","twitter_site":"@Editage","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editage Insights","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018"},"author":{"name":"Editage Insights","@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#\/schema\/person\/71ff452a0868e4716ad471b4a1ed6df6"},"headline":"Academic publishing and scholarly communications: Good reads, April 2018","datePublished":"2018-04-30T13:26:32+00:00","dateModified":"2025-11-25T07:42:48+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018"},"wordCount":1168,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/editage-insights-generic-banner_298.webp","keywords":["Recommended Reading"],"articleSection":["Around the web"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018","url":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018","name":"Academic publishing and scholarly communications: Good reads, April 2018 | Editage Insights","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/editage-insights-generic-banner_298.webp","datePublished":"2018-04-30T13:26:32+00:00","dateModified":"2025-11-25T07:42:48+00:00","description":"Were you on top of the exciting happenings in the scholarly community in this month? From trending discussions on \u201czombie\u201d papers, depression among researchers, fake acceptance letters from journals, and how competition and \u201cNobel lust\u201d affects researchers\u2019 choices, there were several more interesting opinion exchanges among the academics. Read on for a great curated list of the most engaging and thought-provoking content published in the month of April that our team of editors put together.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/editage-insights-generic-banner_298.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/editage-insights-generic-banner_298.webp","width":656,"height":336},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/academic-publishing-and-scholarly-communications-good-reads-april-2018#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Academic publishing and scholarly communications: Good reads, April 2018"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/","name":"Editage Insights","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#organization","name":"Editage Insights","url":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/editage-insights-logo-1-scaled.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/editage-insights-logo-1-scaled.webp","width":2560,"height":324,"caption":"Editage Insights"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Editage","https:\/\/x.com\/Editage"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#\/schema\/person\/71ff452a0868e4716ad471b4a1ed6df6","name":"Editage Insights","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9d33a4703576af04935cc28dc48b743638328ea5bb37abe951330e2024defb9e?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9d33a4703576af04935cc28dc48b743638328ea5bb37abe951330e2024defb9e?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editage Insights"},"url":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/editage-insights"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/451","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=451"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/451\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":42831,"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/451\/revisions\/42831"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/33313"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=451"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=451"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=451"},{"taxonomy":"new_categories","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/new_categories?post=451"},{"taxonomy":"new_tags","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/new_tags?post=451"},{"taxonomy":"series","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/series?post=451"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}