Science Editing

Original Articles

Data journals: types of peer review, review criteria, and editorial committee members’ positions: Sunkyung Seo, Jihyun Kim; Sci Ed. 2020;7(2):130-135. Published online August 20, 2020; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.207

7,017 View
160 Download
3 Web of Science
3 Crossref

Purpose: This study analyzed the peer review systems, criteria, and editorial committee structures of data journals, aiming to determine the current state of data peer review and to offer suggestions.
Methods
We analyzed peer review systems and criteria for peer review in nine data journals indexed by Web of Science, as well as the positions of the editorial committee members of the journals. Each data journal’s website was initially surveyed, and the editors-in-chief were queried via email about any information not found on the websites. The peer review criteria of the journals were analyzed in terms of data quality, metadata quality, and general quality.
Results
Seven of the nine data journals adopted single-blind and open review peer review methods. The remaining two implemented modified models, such as interactive and community review. In the peer review criteria, there was a shared emphasis on the appropriateness of data production methodology and detailed descriptions. The editorial committees of the journals tended to have subject editors or subject advisory boards, while a few journals included positions with the responsibility of evaluating the technical quality of data.
Conclusion
Creating a community of subject experts and securing various editorial positions for peer review are necessary for data journals to achieve data quality assurance and to promote reuse. New practices will emerge in terms of data peer review models, criteria, and editorial positions, and further research needs to be conducted.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Dissemination effect of data papers on scientific datasets
Hong Jiao, Yuhong Qiu, Xiaowei Ma, Bo Yang
Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology.2024; 75(2): 115. CrossRef
The data paper as a sociolinguistic epistemic object: A content analysis on the rhetorical moves used in data paper abstracts
Kai Li, Chenyue Jiao
Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology.2022; 73(6): 834. CrossRef
Korean researchers’ motivations for publishing in data journals and the usefulness of their data: a qualitative study
Jungyeoun Lee, Jihyun Kim
Science Editing.2021; 8(2): 145. CrossRef

Comparative analysis of manuscript management systems for scholarly publishing: Soon Kim, Hyungwook Choi, Nayon Kim, EunKyung Chung, Jae Yun Lee; Sci Ed. 2018;5(2):124-134. Published online August 20, 2018; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.137

20,545 View
356 Download
7 Web of Science
6 Crossref

Abstract PDF

To improve scholarly communications with scientists throughout the world, an international-level manuscript management system is indispensable. We analyzed the manuscript management systems currently in use in Korea and suggested ways to improve these domestic systems through benchmarking with representative overseas systems. Drawing information from the manufacturer’s documentation, we compared the functionalities of the major manuscript management systems available in Korea to international systems. Based on this analysis, we identified the essential elements necessary to meet international standards. The representative international systems provide an intuitive interface and an efficient communication channel for authors, editors, and reviewers, enabling them to save time. The two domestic paid systems are almost at the international level; however, the free systems developed in Korea need to be upgraded. In particular, more advanced visualization tools, more efficient tools for communication between stakeholders, and convenient linking to external content are needed. Studies of these manuscript management systems, which are essential for the internationalization of domestic journals, can be utilized as primary materials to improve the level of Korean academic journals in response to the rapid changes in modern scholarly communication.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Artificial intelligence to support publishing and peer review: A summary and review
Kayvan Kousha, Mike Thelwall
Learned Publishing.2024; 37(1): 4. CrossRef
Should publishers use online submission systems to harvest authors’ responses to diversity, equity and inclusion?
J. A. Teixeira da Silva
Science Editor and Publisher.2023; 7(2): 210. CrossRef
An Exploratory Study into Professional Scholarly Journals Publishing Software Adoption in Lithuania
Vincas Grigas, Arūnas Gudinavičius, Tomas Petreikis, Andrius Šuminas
Information & Media.2023; 96: 179. CrossRef
A Blockchain-Based Editorial Management System
Eman-Yaser Daraghmi, Mamoun Abu Helou, Yousef-Awwad Daraghmi, omar cheikhrouhou
Security and Communication Networks.2021; 2021: 1. CrossRef
Artificial intelligence-assisted tools for redefining the communication landscape of the scholarly world
Habeeb Ibrahim Abdul Razack, Sam T. Mathew, Fathinul Fikri Ahmad Saad, Saleh A. Alqahtani
Science Editing.2021; 8(2): 134. CrossRef
The “invisible hand” of peer review: The implications of author-referee networks on peer review in a scholarly journal
Pierpaolo Dondio, Niccolò Casnici, Francisco Grimaldo, Nigel Gilbert, Flaminio Squazzoni
Journal of Informetrics.2019; 13(2): 708. CrossRef

First
Prev
Page of 1
Next
Last

Search