Featured article:
November 16, 2015 | Leila Jones, Publishing Manager

Submitting an article or managing the peer review process? Think. Check. Submit. to avoid publication fraud

As a researcher, how do you evaluate whether the journal you’re about to send your work to is a legitimate, trusted resource? As a journal editor, how can you reassure potential authors that your publication is a respected, reputable journal? The answer could lie in “Think. Check. Submit.”, a new initiative, launched by a coalition of publishers and industry organizations, which provides tools for researchers to make the process of choosing the right journal for their work clearer.
Featured video:
Featured video
Watch and listen...
Top five articles:

Altmetrics Last week’s top five Taylor & Francis Online articles (recorded by Altmetric).

Recent articles:
  • November 17, 2015 | Cait Morgan, Assistant Editor for Child Care in Practice

    How I use Author Services and Editor Resources

    As assistant editor of a multi-disciplinary journal I am faced with many weird and wonderful questions from authors, reviewers, and fellow editors. Here are some ways in which I use the information on Taylor & Francis’ Author Services and Editor Resources in my day-to-day work.
  • November 16, 2015 | Amanda Ashworth, Publisher

    Veto on the use of null hypothesis testing and p intervals: right or wrong?

    It’s a brave editor who takes a decision to change accepted practice for submissions and peer review, particularly when he knows that his reasoning is controversial, that there are strong opposing views, and that the reaction from the scholarly community is likely to be highly polarized – and very vocal. But that didn’t stop Dr. David Trafimow, editor of Basic and Applied Social Psychology, from announcing in an editorial in the first issue of 2015 that the journal will cease accepting papers that relied on certain statistical methods – especially the null hypothesis significance testing procedure – with immediate effect. Because of the huge amount of attention the editorial has received, we’ve invited Dr. Trafimow and respected colleagues to reflect on the reaction to his editorial and what the ban may mean for future scholarly research.
  • November 12, 2015 | Suzannah Downie, Peer Review Coordinator

    Data falsification and fabrication

    How do you proceed when the integrity of the data in a paper has been questioned? Read on to find out more about data falsification and fabrication, including what to do if allegations are received.
  • November 3, 2015 | Claire Doffegnies, Journals Development Coordinator

    Staying ahead of the curve at our Oxford Editor Round Table

    In today’s fast paced publishing industry, the question of how we can stay ahead of the curve is becoming increasingly important to researchers, publishers and journal editors alike. We decided to dedicate our UK Editor Round Tables to exploring this very question. On 23 October, editors along with representatives from Altmetric and Sense about Science took to St Hugh’s College, Oxford for lively discussion around this topic. We collected insights into a Storify - read tips and insights from the day, and stay tuned to @tandfeditors #tandfeditors for live updates from our next UK Editor Round Table at The Lowry, Salford Quays, on 6 November, 2015.