Science Editing

Original Articles

Korean editors’ and researchers’ experiences with preprints and attitudes towards preprint policies: Hyun Jung Yi, Sun Huh; Sci Ed. 2021;8(1):4-9. Published online February 20, 2021; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.223

5,797 View
200 Download
6 Web of Science
7 Crossref

Purpose
This study investigated editors’ and researcher’s experiences with preprints and their attitudes towards preprint policies in Korea.
Methods
From December 30, 2019 to January 10, 2020, a Google Forms survey was mailed to members of the Korean Council of Science Editors and the Korean Federation of Science and Technology Societies. The 16 survey items included two demographic items, six items on experience with preprints, five 5-point Likert-scale items on attitudes towards preprints, and three items on advantages and disadvantages.
Results
Out of 365 respondents, 56 had deposited their manuscripts on preprint servers, while 49 stated that they allowed preprints in their journals. More than half of the respondents expressed favorable attitudes towards prioritizing preprint deposition, promotion of open access, rapid feedback on preprints, earlier citations, and evidence of research work. Responders in engineering had more experience with the concept of preprints, and were more likely to have heard about preprint servers and preprint deposition by other researchers, than those in medicine. Half of the editors disagreed with the need for preprints, for reasons including a lack of scientific integrity, stealing ideas/scooping data, priority issues regarding research ideas, and copyright problems.
Conclusion
The above results showed that preprints are still not actively used in Korea. Although experiences with preprints were not widespread, more than half of the respondents showed favorable attitudes towards preprints. More of a consensus should emerge for preprint policies to be accepted by editors in Korea.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

The use and acceptability of preprints in health and social care settings: A scoping review
Amanda Jane Blatch-Jones, Alejandra Recio Saucedo, Beth Giddins, Robin Haunschild
PLOS ONE.2023; 18(9): e0291627. CrossRef
Promotion to Top-Tier Journal and Development Strategy of the Annals of Laboratory Medicine for Strengthening its Leadership in the Medical Laboratory Technology Category: A Bibliometric Study
Sun Huh
Annals of Laboratory Medicine.2022; 42(3): 321. CrossRef
Congratulations on Child Health Nursing Research becoming a PubMed Central journal and reflections on its significance
Sun Huh
Child Health Nursing Research.2022; 28(1): 1. CrossRef
The evolution, benefits, and challenges of preprints and their interaction with journals
Pippa Smart
Science Editing.2022; 9(1): 79. CrossRef
Preprint citation practice in PLOS
Marc Bertin, Iana Atanassova
Scientometrics.2022; 127(12): 6895. CrossRef
Attitudes and practices of open data, preprinting, and peer-review—A cross sectional study on Croatian scientists
Ksenija Baždarić, Iva Vrkić, Evgenia Arh, Martina Mavrinac, Maja Gligora Marković, Lidija Bilić-Zulle, Jadranka Stojanovski, Mario Malički, Sergi Lozano
PLOS ONE.2021; 16(6): e0244529. CrossRef
Document Network and Conceptual and Social Structures of Clinical Endoscopy from 2015 to July 2021 Based on the Web of Science Core Collection: A Bibliometric Study
Sun Huh
Clinical Endoscopy.2021; 54(5): 641. CrossRef

How many retracted articles indexed in KoreaMed were cited 1 year after retraction notification: Soo Young Kim, Hyun Jung Yi, Hye-Min Cho, Sun Huh; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):122-127. Published online August 19, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.172

8,663 View
133 Download
9 Web of Science
8 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Purpose
It aimed to investigate how many retracted articles indexed in KoreaMed were cited in both the Scopus and the Korea Medical Citation Index (KoMCI) databases and to investigate whether the frequency of post-retraction citations was different according to the presence of a retraction mark.
Methods
Retracted articles from the KoreaMed database were collected on January 28, 2016. Scopus and KoMCI were searched for post-retraction citations, which were defined as citations 1 year after the retraction, excluding retraction-related citations.
Results
The 114 retracted articles were found in KoreaMed. The proportion of retracted articles in KoreaMed, the Korean medical journal database, through January 2016 was 0.04% (114/256,000). On the journal homepage, a retraction mark was present for 49 of the 114 retracted articles. Of the 114 retracted articles, 45 were cited in Scopus 176 times. Of the 176 citations, 109 (of 36 retracted articles) were post-retraction citations. The number of citations in KoMCI, except for citations of retraction notices, was 33 (of 14 retracted articles). Of those citations, the number of post-retraction citations in KoMCI was 14 (of 8 retracted articles). The presence of a retraction mark did not influence post-retraction citations (P>0.05). Post-retraction citations were frequent in the range of 1 to 3 years.
Conclusion
Post-retraction citations that were found in both Scopus and the KoMCI occurred frequently for retracted articles in KoreaMed. Adoption of Crossmark is recommended as one choice to prevent post-retraction citations.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Expert-recommended biomedical journal articles: Their retractions or corrections, and post-retraction citing
Peiling Wang, Jing Su
Journal of Information Science.2024; 50(1): 17. CrossRef
The indexation of retracted literature in seven principal scholarly databases: a coverage comparison of dimensions, OpenAlex, PubMed, Scilit, Scopus, The Lens and Web of Science
José Luis Ortega, Lorena Delgado-Quirós
Scientometrics.2024; 129(7): 3769. CrossRef
Exploring perception of retraction based on mentioned status in post-retraction citations
Xiaojuan Liu, Chenlin Wang, Dar-Zen Chen, Mu-Hsuan Huang
Journal of Informetrics.2022; 16(3): 101304. CrossRef
Inconsistent and incomplete retraction of published research: A cross-sectional study on Covid-19 retractions and recommendations to mitigate risks for research, policy and practice
Geoff Frampton, Lois Woods, David Alexander Scott, Eleanor Ochodo
PLOS ONE.2021; 16(10): e0258935. CrossRef
Continued use of retracted papers: Temporal trends in citations and (lack of) awareness of retractions shown in citation contexts in biomedicine
Tzu-Kun Hsiao, Jodi Schneider
Quantitative Science Studies.2021; 2(4): 1144. CrossRef
Does retraction after misconduct have an impact on citations? A pre–post study
Cristina Candal-Pedreira, Alberto Ruano-Ravina, Esteve Fernández, Jorge Ramos, Isabel Campos-Varela, Mónica Pérez-Ríos
BMJ Global Health.2020; 5(11): e003719. CrossRef
Comprehensive Analysis of Retracted Publications in Dentistry: A 23-Year Review
Shannon Samuel, Joe Mathew Cherian, Abi M. Thomas, Stefano Corbella
International Journal of Dentistry.2020; 2020: 1. CrossRef
Continued post-retraction citation of a fraudulent clinical trial report, 11 years after it was retracted for falsifying data
Jodi Schneider, Di Ye, Alison M. Hill, Ashley S. Whitehorn
Scientometrics.2020; 125(3): 2877. CrossRef

Current and planned adoption of data sharing policies by editors of Korean scholarly journals: Soo Young Kim, Hyun Jung Yi, Sun Huh; Sci Ed. 2019;6(1):19-24. Published online February 20, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.151

7,684 View
174 Download
13 Web of Science
17 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Purpose
This study analyzed the present status of data sharing polices and attitudes towards such policies through a web-based survey of editors of scholarly journals published in Korea.
Methods
From December 26, 2018 to January 3, 2019, a survey was distributed to 1,055 persons listed in the member directories of both the Korean Council of Science Editors and the Korean Federation of Science & Technology Societies. The survey contained four items on subjects’ information, three items that gathered information about the journals, and two further items on reasons for adopting or not adopting a data sharing policy and further opinions about such policies.
Results
Of the 100 respondents (from 100 journals), 13 stated that their journals had already adopted a data sharing policy. The strength of the policy was recommendation-only in 10 of those 13 journals. The most frequent reason for adopting a data sharing policy was to follow international trends. The repository sites were the Harvard Dataverse for two journals and Mendeley Data for one. The most common reasons for not adopting a data sharing policy were a lack of knowledge on data sharing, the possibility that submitters would not want to share their data, and the questionable effect of data sharing on scientific development.
Conclusion
Data sharing policies were uncommon among Korean scholarly journals. The advantages and disadvantages of adopting such policies should be discussed more actively among editors and researchers. Furthermore, data sharing infrastructure and training courses are required for data sharing policies to be established in scholarly journals in Korea.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Research data policy: a library and information science publishers’ perspective
Kavya Asok, Dinesh Kumar Gupta, Prashant Shrivastava
Quality & Quantity.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Korean scholarly journal editors’ and publishers’ attitudes towards journal data sharing policies and data papers (2023): a survey-based descriptive study
Hyun Jun Yi, Youngim Jung, Hyekyong Hwang, Sung-Nam Cho
Science Editing.2023; 10(2): 141. CrossRef
Congratulations on Child Health Nursing Research becoming a PubMed Central journal and reflections on its significance
Sun Huh
Child Health Nursing Research.2022; 28(1): 1. CrossRef
Research data policies of journals in the Chinese Science Citation Database based on the language, publisher, discipline, access model and metrics
Yu Wang, Beibei Chen, Liangbin Zhao, Yuanxiang Zeng
Learned Publishing.2022; 35(1): 30. CrossRef
Ten Tips for Performing Your First Peer Review: The Next Step for the Aspiring Academic Plastic Surgeon
Martin Frendø, Andreas Frithioff, Steven Arild Wuyts Andersen
Archives of Plastic Surgery.2022; 49(04): 538. CrossRef
Status and factors associated with the adoption of data sharing policies in Asian journals
Jihyun Kim, Seo Young Bai
Science Editing.2022; 9(2): 97. CrossRef
Open Data Policies among Library and Information Science Journals
Brian Jackson
Publications.2021; 9(2): 25. CrossRef
The Journal Citation Indicator has arrived for Emerging Sources Citation Index journals, including the Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions, in June 2021
Sun Huh
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2021; 18: 20. CrossRef
How to Deal with the Concept of Authorship and the Approval of an Institutional Review Board When Writing and Editing Journal Articles
Sun Huh
Laboratory Medicine and Quality Assurance.2020; 42(2): 63. CrossRef
Position of Ultrasonography in the scholarly journal network based on bibliometrics and developmental strategies for it to become a top-tier journal
Sun Huh
Ultrasonography.2020; 39(3): 238. CrossRef
Status of the data sharing policies of scholarly journals published in Brazil, France, and Korea and listed in both the 2018 Scimago Journal and Country Ranking and the Web of Science
Geum Hee Jeong
Science Editing.2020; 7(2): 136. CrossRef
How Annals of Dermatology Has Improved the Scientific Quality and Ethical Standards of its Articles in the Two-Year Period since October 2018
Sun Huh
Annals of Dermatology.2020; 32(5): 353. CrossRef
Two international public platforms for the exposure of Archives of Plastic Surgery to worldwide researchers and surgeons: PubMed Central and Crossref
Sun Huh
Archives of Plastic Surgery.2020; 47(5): 377. CrossRef
Data sharing policies of journals in life, health, and physical sciences indexed in Journal Citation Reports
Jihyun Kim, Soon Kim, Hye-Min Cho, Jae Hwa Chang, Soo Young Kim
PeerJ.2020; 8: e9924. CrossRef
Compliance of “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing” in academic society published journals
Hyung Wook Choi, Ye Jin Choi, Soon Kim
Science Editing.2019; 6(2): 112. CrossRef
Recent trends in medical journals’ data sharing policies and statements of data availability
Sun Huh
Archives of Plastic Surgery.2019; 46(06): 493. CrossRef
Strategie postępowania z danymi badawczymi w polskich i zagranicznych czasopismach reprezentujących nauki historyczne
Adam Jachimczyk
Studia Medioznawcze.2019; 21(1): 475. CrossRef

Meeting Report

Eighth International Congress on Peer Review and Scientific Publication: Hyun Jung Yi; Sci Ed. 2018;5(1):76-78. Published online February 19, 2018; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.125

10,903 View
205 Download

PDF

Essay

Introduction of S2Journal for the aggregation of journal information: Hyun Jung Yi; Sci Ed. 2017;4(2):89-92. Published online August 16, 2017; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.102

9,930 View
152 Download
1 Web of Science
1 Crossref

PDF

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

A systematic review of mobile payment literature: What has been studied and what should be studied?
Jinkyung Ha, Changi Nam, Seongcheol Kim
Telecommunications Policy.2024; 48(7): 102795. CrossRef

Case Study

Analysis of the results of the first implementation of the Korea Manuscript Editors Certification: Hyun Jung Yi, Jae Hwa Chang, Yoon Joo Seo; Sci Ed. 2017;4(1):34-38. Published online February 20, 2017; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.87

10,085 View
158 Download
4 Web of Science
5 Crossref

Abstract PDF

In the field of international scholarly journal publishing, manuscript editing has been established as an essential component of the publication process. As the necessity of this process has increased, the Korean Council of Science Editors has consistently provided education for training professional manuscript editors, and has worked to implement a manuscript editor certification system. Starting in 2014, the Korean Council of Science Editors thoroughly conducted background research and advanced analysis in preparation for such a system. Subsequently, a committee of experts was formed to develop and simulate an examination for this certification. This process culminated in the first manuscript editor certification examination, which was held in November 2016 and resulted in 40 initial Korea Manuscript Editors Certification holders. Examinations for the Korea Manuscript Editors Certification are scheduled to be held annually. The establishment of this certification system will contribute to strengthening individual capacities and further developing science journal publication in Korea by expanding the field of manuscript editing. Ultimately, this system will contribute to the promotion of Korean scientific journals to the level of prominent international journals.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Presidential address: How to cope with the present environment of scholarly journal publishing
Sun Huh
Science Editing.2020; 7(1): 1. CrossRef
Search engines and software for manuscript editing
Yeonwook Kim
Science Editing.2020; 7(1): 88. CrossRef
Recent advances of medical journals in Korea and and further development strategies: Is it possible for them to publish Nobel Prize-winning research?
Sun Huh
Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2018; 61(9): 524. CrossRef
Reflections on the Basic Manuscript Editors’ Training 2017
Hakbong Lee
Science Editing.2017; 4(2): 93. CrossRef
How to successfully list a journal in the Social Science Citation Index or Science Citation Index Expanded
Sun Huh
Korean Journal of Medical Education.2017; 29(4): 221. CrossRef

Meeting Report

International Society of Managing and Technical Editors’ Asian Conference 2016: Hyun Jung Yi; Sci Ed. 2016;3(2):119-121. Published online August 20, 2016; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.78

9,247 View
126 Download

PDF

Case Study

Trends in document delivery system in the Medical Library Information System of the Korean Medical Library Association: Hyun Jung Yi; Sci Ed. 2016;3(1):33-35. Published online February 19, 2016; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.60

12,971 View
146 Download
1 Web of Science
1 Crossref

Abstract PDF

This case study aimed at disclosing the changing trends of amount of document delivery services (DDSs) in the Medical Library Information System (MEDLIS) of the Korean Medical Library Association (KMLA). The data from 2001 to 2014 in the MEDLIS were searched and analyzed according to year. To know outside environment of DDS, The trend in use of DDS of the Research Information Sharing Service and the journals listed in the Directory of Open Access Journal were presented. The DDS request in MEDLIS decreased year by year from 214,304 in 2001 to 50,352 in 2014 (23.4%). There was an increased number of requests a monthly average from 4,799 in 2009 to 8,157 in 2014 (170.0%) through Research Information Sharing Service. As of 2015, 10,702 journals were listed in the Directory of Open Access Journal. I can find that the continuous decreased request of DDS in MEDLIS which might be originated from the increased number of DDS service through RISS and the increased number of open access journals.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

An analysis of interlibrary loan services: a case study of a university in South Africa
Siviwe Bangani, Sabelo Chizwina, Mathew Moyo
Information Discovery and Delivery.2018; 46(1): 26. CrossRef

Original Article

Towards the implementation of a system for manuscript editor certification: Hyun Jung Yi, Hye-Min Cho, Hee Kyung Chung, Hwan Tae Ahn, Myung-Soon Kim, Yoon Joo Seo; Sci Ed. 2016;3(1):3-12. Published online February 19, 2016; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.56

13,880 View
143 Download
1 Web of Science
1 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Style and format are important criteria for evaluating a journal and indexing it in major databases. In Korean science, technology, and medical journals, interest in manuscript editing has increased over the past seven to eight years, and the responsibilities of manuscript editors have expanded as well. However, since no clear standards for the roles and qualifications for manuscript editors are yet available, a formal certification system is needed to establish appropriate standards and to provide professional training. To identify ways of developing a manuscript editor certification program in Korea, this study investigated similar certification programs in and outside the country and surveyed 195 Korean editors, manuscript editors, publishers, and medical librarians. The survey revealed that manuscript editors were necessary (mean score of 4.38 on a five-point Likert scale, with a score of 5 indicating strong agreement), and that their main contributions were efficiently managing the editorial board, improving the accuracy of references, and accelerating the editing process. The respondents were also positive about the possibility of implementing a manuscript editor certification; 45.1% showed interest in becoming certified, and 47.1% reported interest in hiring a certified manuscript editor. Regarding the system for issuing certification, respondents favored a professional training course (53.1%), validation of work experience (27.1%), or an examination (16.8%). This study concludes that it is essential to establish a formal certification program to train manuscript editors properly, and an examination system is the most efficient and suitable method for managing the certification process.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Analysis of the results of the first implementation of the Korea Manuscript Editors Certification
Hyun Jung Yi, Jae Hwa Chang, Yoon Joo Seo
Science Editing.2017; 4(1): 34. CrossRef

First
Prev
Page of 1
Next
Last

Search