Today's Read Contributor The global scholarly publishing community gathered on October 7, 2025, for the ninth annual New Directions in Scholarly Publishing seminar, hosted by the Society for Scholarly Publishing (SSP). The event, held in the heart of the nation’s capital, brought together a dynamic mix of publishers, librarians, researchers, academics, and policy professionals from around the world. The seminar served as both a reflection on the state of scholarly communication and a forward-looking forum for shaping the systems that influence how knowledge is created, evaluated, and shared.
This year’s theme, “Show Me the Incentive, and I’ll Show You the Outcome: Mapping the Forces Shaping Knowledge Creation and Dissemination,” captured the essence of an increasingly urgent conversation in the academic world: how the incentive structures embedded within research, funding, and publishing systems are shaping the integrity and direction of global scholarship. The focus on incentives signaled a recognition that behind every paper published, every grant awarded, and every tenure decision made lies a complex web of motivations that influence the behavior of scholars and institutions alike.
The event opened with a keynote address by Meaghan Phelan, Executive Editor of Science News, whose remarks resonated deeply with the audience. Phelan explored the growing challenge of maintaining public trust in scientific research at a time when skepticism toward institutions and misinformation are at historic highs. She argued that scholarly publishers play a pivotal role in bridging the gap between rigorous science and public understanding. “Our role is not only to vet information but to contextualize it responsibly,” Phelan said. “Transparency, accessibility, and accountability are the foundation of trust. Without those, even the best science can lose its voice.” Her keynote set an introspective tone that carried throughout the day, emphasizing the ethical and cultural dimensions of the scholarly publishing enterprise.
Following the keynote, attendees participated in a full day of panels, case studies, and interactive roundtable sessions that tackled some of the most pressing issues facing the academic publishing ecosystem. Much of the discussion centered on how current systems of recognition and reward—such as publication counts, citation metrics, and grant acquisition—can inadvertently distort research priorities. Many panelists argued that these structures often push scholars to prioritize quantity over quality, leading to duplication, “salami slicing” of research findings, and inequitable access to publishing opportunities.
A particularly lively discussion emerged around the topic of peer review reform. As artificial intelligence tools become more integrated into editorial workflows, participants debated how these technologies can support, rather than supplant, human expertise. Editors shared examples of AI-assisted tools used to detect plagiarism, suggest reviewers, and even assess statistical robustness. However, the consensus among the participants was that peer review must remain, at its core, a human endeavor guided by fairness, transparency, and subject expertise. Some panelists expressed optimism about new models of open peer review, where reviewer comments and author responses are made publicly available, fostering accountability and a deeper understanding of scholarly dialogue.
The seminar also addressed the global movement toward open access publishing, a topic that continues to redefine the economics and ethics of scholarly communication. Discussions highlighted both progress and ongoing challenges: while more journals and institutions have embraced open access models, inequities persist in how the costs are distributed. Representatives from university presses and independent publishers voiced concerns about the sustainability of “author-pays” models, which can disadvantage researchers in the Global South or those without institutional funding. Several speakers called for collaborative funding mechanisms that would allow for equitable participation in open access publishing, ensuring that access to publishing opportunities does not depend on an author’s financial resources.
Another significant focus of the seminar was on research assessment and academic reward systems. Speakers from universities and research funders described ongoing experiments to broaden the metrics used to evaluate scholarly impact. Rather than relying solely on citation counts or journal prestige, some institutions are beginning to recognize other contributions such as mentorship, data sharing, and public engagement. These shifts, though gradual, were seen as signs of a changing culture in academia—one that values openness, integrity, and social impact alongside productivity. Several participants noted that rethinking evaluation systems could have a transformative effect on research behaviors, encouraging collaboration over competition.
Throughout the day, participants repeatedly returned to the underlying theme of incentives. Attendees agreed that many of the systemic challenges in scholarly communication—from inequitable access to information to the replication crisis—can be traced to how researchers are rewarded and recognized. “You get the behaviors that you incentivize,” said one panelist from a major European research funder. “If we reward volume, we get volume. If we reward rigor, collaboration, and transparency, we get better science.” This sentiment encapsulated the day’s overarching message: the path toward a more trustworthy and equitable scholarly system begins with structural change.
The seminar’s format encouraged interaction and reflection. In-person attendees took part in small-group discussions during the event’s popular “Dinner Dialogues”, where they exchanged perspectives in a relaxed, collegial setting. At the same time, virtual attendees participated through a robust hybrid platform featuring captioned live streams, breakout sessions, and interactive polls. The format underscored SSP’s commitment to accessibility and inclusivity, ensuring that participants from around the globe could engage fully in the conversations shaping their industry.
The event closed with a call to action from SSP leadership, urging the community to continue addressing the root causes of inequity and inefficiency within the research ecosystem. Lettie Conrad, SSP President, reminded participants that lasting change would require collaboration across institutional boundaries. “Incentives are the invisible architecture of scholarship,” she said. “If we want a more equitable and effective system, we have to redesign those structures intentionally—together.” Conrad’s remarks drew a standing ovation and left participants with a sense of shared purpose as they looked ahead to implementing the ideas discussed.
By the end of the day, it was clear that the 2025 New Directions seminar had achieved its aim: to spark critical dialogue about the incentive systems that shape every stage of scholarly communication. As research becomes more global, interdisciplinary, and data-driven, the need for cooperation among publishers, funders, and institutions has never been greater. Attendees departed the event with a renewed sense of urgency—and optimism—about the future of their field. Many noted that while reforming entrenched incentive systems is a formidable challenge, the growing alignment of values across the scholarly ecosystem represents real progress.
The SSP’s New Directions seminar has, over the years, evolved from a niche industry meeting into one of the most important annual gatherings in academic publishing. The 2025 edition continued that tradition by confronting difficult questions head-on and fostering meaningful dialogue among stakeholders who are not always in agreement but share a common goal: to advance the integrity, accessibility, and impact of global scholarship. In a time of rapid change and uncertainty, the seminar served as a reminder that the academic community’s strength lies not only in its research but in its willingness to critically examine the systems that sustain it.
