Science Editing

Case Study

Copyright policies of science and engineering open access journals indexed in Science Citation Index Expanded or Scopus, published by Korean academic societies: a case study: Dae Un Hong, Ju Yoen Lee; Sci Ed. 2024;11(1):62-72. Published online February 20, 2024; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.330

1,094 View
41 Download

Abstract PDF: This article explores the challenges related to copyright policies in the context of science and engineering open access (OA) journals based in Korea. The English-language science and engineering OA journals published independently by Korean academic societies typically exhibit three common characteristics regarding their copyright and licensing policies. First, authors are generally required to transfer their copyrights. Second, the Creative Commons (CC) license terms are predominantly BY-NC (Attribution-NonCommercial), without providing authors the option to select alternative licensing terms. Third, the journals do not sufficiently protect the rights of the authors. From the analyses presented herein, it is evident that the current copyright and licensing policies of Korea’s English-language science and engineering OA journals lack a robust structure. These policies need to be revised to allow authors to retain copyright and require them to consent for the CC license terms it adopts, in order to align with the common practice among OA journals. Furthermore, to better protect authors’ rights, it would be beneficial to permit authors to choose the specific terms of the CC license for their articles.

Original Articles

Co-authorship network analysis of North Korean chemistry researchers based on issues of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering published from 2008 to 2022: a bibliometric study: Eunmi Park, Ho-Yeol Yoon; Sci Ed. 2024;11(1):38-43. Published online February 20, 2024; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.329

792 View
41 Download

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material: Purpose: This study conducted a comprehensive analysis of North Korean domestic journals, using scientific quantification methodologies to identify prominent researchers and research areas within the field of chemistry.
Methods
Data were collected from the journal Chemistry and Chemical Engineering published in North Korea. Through an analysis of co-authorship relations and literature reviews of papers authored by researchers who were highly influential in research networks, core research areas were identified.
Results
The researcher with the highest number of publications in the given period was Yong-Chol Lee, with 31 publications, followed closely by Gyun Kim, who also demonstrated significant research activity. When focusing on the last 5 years, Myeong-Cheol Hong emerged as a prominent figure. Yong-Chol Lee has expertise across diverse fields of chemistry, including fine chemicals, biochemistry, and mineral materials. Gyun Kim, in contrast, is recognized for his in-depth knowledge of organics, enzymes, processes, catalysis, fine chemicals, and industrial chemistry. Myung-Cheol Hong’s research primarily centers around organic chemical synthesis within the fine chemical domain. All three researchers are making substantial contributions to the chemical industry.
Conclusion
The findings of this study provide valuable insights into research trends in the field of chemistry in North Korea and contribute to a broader understanding of the discipline’s internal knowledge structure within the global academic community. This research is anticipated to be especially useful for scholars who are analyzing bibliographic information pertaining to North Korea.

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; Sci Ed. 2023;10(2):141-148. Published online August 17, 2023; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.316

1,726 View
214 Download

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material: Purpose: This study aimed to ascertain the attitudes of Korean scholarly journal editors and publishers toward research data sharing policies and the publication of data papers through a survey.
Methods
Between May 16 and June 16, 2023, a SurveyMonkey survey link was distributed to 388 societies, including 270 member societies of the Korean Council of Science Editors and 118 societies that used an e-submission system operated by the Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information. A total of 78 societies (20.1%) responded, from which 72 responses (18.6%) were analyzed after excluding invalid responses.
Results
Out of the representatives of 72 journals, 20 editors or publishers (27.8%) declared a data sharing policy. Those journals that did not have such a policy often expressed uncertainty about their future plans regarding this issue. A common concern was a potential decrease in manuscript submissions, primarily due to the increased workload this policy might impose on editors and manuscript editors. Four respondents (5.6%) had published data papers, with two of them including this as a publication type in their author guidelines. Concerns about copyright and data licensing were cited as drawbacks to publishing data papers. However, the expansion of publication types and the promotion of data reuse were viewed as benefits.
Conclusion
Korean scholarly journal editors’ and publishers’ attitudes toward data sharing policy and publishing data papers are not yet favorable. More training courses are needed to raise awareness of data sharing platforms and emphasize the need for research data sharing and data papers.

Data sharing attitudes and practices of researchers in Korean government research institutes: a survey-based descriptive study: Jihyun Kim, Hyekyong Hwang, Youngim Jung, Sung-Nam Cho, Tae-Sul Seo; Sci Ed. 2023;10(1):71-77. Published online February 16, 2023; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.299

1,899 View
233 Download
3 Web of Science
3 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Purpose: This study explored to what extent and how researchers in five Korean government research institutes that implement research data management practices share their research data and investigated the challenges they perceive regarding data sharing.
Methods
The study collected survey data from 224 respondents by posting a link to a SurveyMonkey questionnaire on the homepage of each of the five research institutes from June 15 to 29, 2022. Descriptive statistical analyses were conducted.
Results
Among 148 respondents with data sharing experience, the majority had shared some or most of their data. Restricted data sharing within a project was more common than sharing data with outside researchers on request or making data publicly available. Sharing data directly with researchers who asked was the most common method of data sharing, while sharing data via institutional repositories was the second most common method. The most frequently cited factors impeding data sharing included the time and effort required to organize data, concerns about copyright or ownership of data, lack of recognition and reward, and concerns about data containing sensitive information.
Conclusion
Researchers need ongoing training and support on making decisions about access to data, which are nuanced rather than binary. Research institutes’ commitment to developing and maintaining institutional data repositories is also important to facilitate data sharing. To address barriers to data sharing, it is necessary to implement research data management services that help reduce effort and mitigate concerns about legal issues. Possible incentives for researchers who share data should also continue to be explored.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

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
Data sharing and data governance in sub-Saharan Africa: Perspectives from researchers and scientists engaged in data-intensive research
Siti M. Kabanda, Nezerith Cengiz, Kanshukan Rajaratnam, Bruce W. Watson, Qunita Brown, Tonya M. Esterhuizen, Keymanthri Moodley
South African Journal of Science.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Identifying key factors and actions: Initial steps in the Open Science Policy Design and Implementation Process
Hanna Shmagun, Jangsup Shim, Jaesoo Kim, Kwang-Nam Choi, Charles Oppenheim
Journal of Information Science.2023;[Epub] CrossRef

Case Studys

PubMed Central as a platform for the survival of open-access biomedical society journals published in Korea: Sun Huh; Sci Ed. 2021;8(2):153-158. Published online August 20, 2021; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.247

4,311 View
151 Download
3 Web of Science
6 Crossref

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material

Twenty-one years have passed since PubMed Central (PMC) launched. The present case study describes Korean editors’ history of participation in PMC and their contributions to PMC. The three main turning points in the history of Korean editors’ involvement with PMC were as follows: first, the production of PMC XML files and deposition starting in 2008; second, thorough evaluations of applying journals since 2014; and third, the feasibility of non-English journals being indexed in PMC starting in 2019. The importance of PMC is further shown by the fact that KoreaMed Synapse, a full-text XML database of biomedical journals in Korea that was launched in 2007, was created by benchmarking PMC. Scholarly societies or institutes publish 724 (34.2%) of the 2,119 PMC journals without embargo in June 2021. Out of those 724 journals, 127 (17.5%) are published in Korea. PMC has helped local journals receive more citations from researchers worldwide, increasing their likelihood of being indexed in international databases. The number of submissions from international researchers has increased, thereby making it possible for journals to achieve international diversity. As the best full-text platform of biomedical journals, PMC has provided an excellent opportunity for biomedical journal editors in Korea to change their journals’ language to English and produce full-text JATS (Journal Article Tag Suite) XML files. These factors have made Korea the second-ranked country in terms of no-embargo PMC journals published by academic societies or institutes.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Journal metrics, document network, and conceptual and social structures of the Korean Journal of Anesthesiology from 2017 to July 2022: a bibliometric study
Sun Huh
Korean Journal of Anesthesiology.2023; 76(1): 3. 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
Suggestions for Exercise Science’s Promotion to a Top-Tier Journal in the Category of Sports Science
Sun Huh
Exercise Science.2022; 31(3): 279. CrossRef
Marking the inclusion of the Korean Journal of Women Health Nursing in PubMed Central and strategies to be promoted to a top-tier journal in the nursing category
Sun Huh
Korean Journal of Women Health Nursing.2022; 28(3): 165. CrossRef
The Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery is indexed by PubMed Central in 2022
Sun Jin Park
Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery.2022; 25(3): 85. CrossRef

Was the number of submissions to scholarly journals in Korea affected by the COVID-19 pandemic?: Sun Huh; Sci Ed. 2021;8(1):117-122. Published online February 20, 2021; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.239

4,201 View
98 Download
3 Web of Science
3 Crossref

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material

This study investigated whether there was an increase in submissions to scholarly journals in Korea according to journals’ field and indexation status in Scopus or Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) in 2020, the year when the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic first spread throughout the world. The analysis included 60 journals with esubmission systems operated by M2PI. Yearly and monthly submissions were counted from 2016 to 2020. The yearly proportional change was also calculated. In 2020, submissions soared for medical journals indexed in Scopus/SCIE (49.5%), corresponding to an increase of 36.9% relative to the expected number of submissions. There was also a surge of submissions to these journals from March to July 2020. However, non-medical journals and medical journals not indexed in Scopus/SCIE did not show an increase in submissions. The number of submissions to scholarly journals in Korea was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic in a specific subset of journals. The background of the spike in submissions is required to be re-investigated. Editors’ burden also should be mitigated through editorial board members’ help and publishers’ support.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Emergence of the metaverse and ChatGPT in journal publishing after the COVID-19 pandemic
Sun Huh
Science Editing.2023; 10(1): 1. CrossRef
Application of computer-based testing in the Korean Medical Licensing Examination, the emergence of the metaverse in medical education, journal metrics and statistics, and appreciation to reviewers and volunteers
Sun Huh
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2022; 19: 2. CrossRef
Review of studies about bat-fly interactions inside roosts, with observations on partnership patterns for publications
Gustavo Lima Urbieta, Gustavo Graciolli, Valéria da Cunha Tavares
Parasitology Research.2022; 121(11): 3051. CrossRef

Korean court cases regarding research and publication ethics from 2009 to 2020: Ju Yoen Lee; Sci Ed. 2021;8(1):98-103. Published online February 20, 2021; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.236

4,596 View
137 Download
1 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Research and publication misconduct may occur in various forms, including author misrepresentation, plagiarism, and data fabrication. Research and publication ethics are essentially not legal duties, but ethical obligations. In reality, however, legal disputes arise over whether research and publication ethics have been violated. Thus, in many cases, misconduct in research and publication is determined in the courts. This article presents noteworthy legal cases in Korea regarding research and publication ethics to help editors and authors prevent ethical misconduct. Legal cases from 2009 to 2020 were collected from the database of the Supreme Court of Korea in December 2020. These court cases represent three case types: 1) civil cases, such as affirmation of nullity of dismissal and damages; 2) criminal cases, such as fraud, interference with business, and violations of copyright law; and 3) administrative cases related to disciplinary measures against professors affiliated with a university. These cases show that although research and publication ethics are ethical norms that are autonomously established by the relevant academic societies, they become a criterion for case resolution in legal disputes where research and publication misconduct is at issue.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

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

Original Articles

Network of institutions, source journals, and keywords on COVID-19 by Korean authors based on the Web of Science Core Collection in January 2021: Kyung Won Kim, Geum Hee Jeong; Sci Ed. 2021;8(1):47-56. Published online February 20, 2021; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.229

5,038 View
150 Download
5 Web of Science
6 Crossref

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material

Purpose: The aim of this study was to characterize the network of institutions, journals, and topics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) literature by Korean authors in the Web of Science Core Collection. The specific goals were to identify the collaborative relationships between Korean authors and international authors and to explore clusters of institutions, journals, and topics.
Methods
Literature was searched in the Web of Science Core Collection on January 30, 2021. The search terms were “SARS-CoV-2” or “COVID” or “novel coronavirus” in the subject field. The search results were limited again to “South Korea” as the country and the publication type of “article.” The measurement tool was Biblioshiny, an app version tool for Bibliometrix.
Results
Korean authors published 3.2 times more COVID-19–related articles in journals outside of Korea than in Korean journals. The journals showed three clusters by bibliographic coupling. In contrast, the co-citation network showed four clusters. Only a few journals were included in the clusters in both analyses. The conceptual structure of Keywords Plus by factorial analysis showed two clusters: “pathology and clinical treatment” and “knowledge and attitudes.” Institutions’ collaborative network consisted of four clusters. Korean researchers actively collaborated with international researchers, especially those in the United States.
Conclusion
Because only a few Korean journals were included in the journal clusters by both coupling and co-citation network, more active citation of Korean journals is recommended. The identification of human behavior as a distinct theme in COVID-19 research suggests a different focus in this area besides clinical studies.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

A scientometric analysis of the effect of COVID-19 on the spread of research outputs
Gianpaolo Zammarchi, Andrea Carta, Silvia Columbu, Luca Frigau, Monica Musio
Quality & Quantity.2024; 58(3): 2265. CrossRef
Journal metrics, document network, and conceptual and social structures of the Korean Journal of Anesthesiology from 2017 to July 2022: a bibliometric study
Sun Huh
Korean Journal of Anesthesiology.2023; 76(1): 3. CrossRef
Distance is no longer a barrier to healthcare services: current state and future trends of telehealth research
Saumyaranjan Sahoo, Junali Sahoo, Satish Kumar, Weng Marc Lim, Nisreen Ameen
Internet Research.2023; 33(3): 890. 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
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
Better, Faster, Stronger: The Evolution of Co-authorship in International Management Research Between 1990 and 2016
Oliver Wieczorek, Markus Eckl, Madeleine Bausch, Erik Radisch, Christoph Barmeyer, Malte Rehbein
SAGE Open.2021; 11(4): 215824402110615. CrossRef

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

4,837 View
194 Download
6 Web of Science
7 Crossref

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material

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

Case Study

Analysis of consultations by the Committee for Publication Ethics of the Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors: You Sun Kim, Dong Soo Han; Sci Ed. 2020;7(2):184-188. Published online August 20, 2020; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.215

4,949 View
113 Download
4 Web of Science
3 Crossref

Abstract PDF

This study aimed to analyze the inquiries on research and publication ethics submitted to the Committee for Publication Ethics of the Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. A total of 80 inquiries were initiated over the course of 3 years, from April 2017 to March 2020. Based on a categorization of these inquiries, four common topics are discussed in detail. We present specific cases derived from actual situations, and the steps taken in processing these inquiries. The number of inquiries by topic was as follows: duplicate publications (12), secondary publications (11), authorship disputes (11), informed consent (6), proceedings (5), copyright (5), institutional review board approval (5), plagiarism (4), corrections (4), and others (17). Cases of duplicate publication and authorship disputes can be treated according to the flow chart of the Committee on Publication Ethics of the United Kingdom. Secondary publications may be permitted if the readers or audiences are different and both journals’ editors grant permission. Editors should be cautious about publishing cases without informed consent, even in the absence of identifiable photos, because patients or their families may be able to identify the cases. An adequate awareness of ethical considerations relevant to publication can help reduce the number of instances of research and publication ethics misconduct.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Ethics Committees: Structure, Roles, and Issues
Pankti Mehta, Olena Zimba, Armen Yuri Gasparyan, Birzhan Seiil, Marlen Yessirkepov
Journal of Korean Medical Science.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Analysis of duplicated publications in Russian journals
Yury V. Chekhovich, Andrey V. Khazov
Journal of Informetrics.2022; 16(1): 101246. CrossRef
Consultation questions on publication ethics from 2016 to 2020 addressed by the Committee on Publication Ethics of the Korean Council of Science Editors
Woo Jin Son, Cheol-Heui Yun
Science Editing.2021; 8(1): 112. CrossRef

Original Article

Changes in bibliographic information associated with Korean scientific journals from 2011 to 2019: Yoon Joo Seo, Hye-Min Cho, Sun Huh; Sci Ed. 2020;7(1):11-15. Published online February 20, 2020; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.184

4,873 View
140 Download
4 Web of Science
4 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Purpose: This study aimed to examine how the bibliographic information of 558 journals that applied for the Korean Federation of Science and Technology Societies funding in 2011 changed from 2011 to 2019, with the goal of informing the development of Korean scientific journals.
Methods
Between May and October 2012, bibliographic information from 558 journals was obtained from PDF files for the print versions of one issue of 2011 and the journal homepages. In August 2019, the bibliographic information of the same journals was traced based only on the journal websites. We compared bibliographic information.
Results
Excluding 14 journals that were discontinued or integrated with other journals prior to the follow-up in 2019, 544 journals were compared. Over the 8-year period, 121 journals underwent title changes. The number of journals with eISSNs (electronic International Standard Serial Number) increased from 214 (39.3%) in 2011 to 488 (89.7%) in 2019. “Aims and scope” descriptions were found for 291 journals (53.5%) in 2011 and 482 (88.6%) in 2019. The number of English-only journals increased from 163 (30.0%) to 227 (41.7%), and the number of journals with an open access policy rose from 92 (16.9%) to 315 (57.9%). Journals with DOI (digital object identifier) prefixes increased from 256 (47.1%) to 536 (98.5%).
Conclusion
The increased frequency of the above bibliographic information is evidence of the globalization of local journals. However, even in 2019, some journals still lacked the necessary bibliographic information. For better dissemination and promotion of Korean scientific journals, editors and publishers should more critically consider the proper inclusion of information on journal websites.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Comparison of the open access status and metrics of Scopus journals published in East Asian countries: a descriptive study
Eungi Kim, Da-Yeong Jeong
Science Editing.2023; 10(1): 57. CrossRef
Presidential address: the Korean Council of Science Editors as a board member of Crossref from March 2021 to February 2024
Sun Huh
Science Editing.2021; 8(1): 1. CrossRef
PubMed Central as a platform for the survival of open-access biomedical society journals published in Korea
Sun Huh
Science Editing.2021; 8(2): 153. 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

Review

History of the Scopus Expert Content Selection and Advisory Committee of Korea: Hyungsun Kim; Sci Ed. 2020;7(1):6-10. Published online February 20, 2020; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.183

5,073 View
119 Download
2 Web of Science
2 Crossref

Abstract PDF

With the objective of improving the quality of Korean journals and elevating them to international standards, the National Research Foundation of Korea, in consultation with Elsevier, formed the Scopus Expert Content Selection and Advisory Committee-Korea (ECSAC-Korea) as a local selection committee in August 2012. The committee reviews Korean journals for Scopus indexing and recommends them to the Scopus Content Selection and Advisory Board. In September 2019, ECSAC-Korea became part of the Korean Council of Science Editors (KCSE). This article describes the current status of Scopus indexing in Korea and the history, organizational structure, and role of ECSAC-Korea as part of the KCSE. The article also introduces the members of ECSAC-Korea and the KCSE steering committee for Scopus ECSAC-Korea, who have been active since September 2019.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Role of academic publishers in 10 years: a perspective from the Chairman of Elsevier
Youngsuk Chi
Science Editing.2022; 9(1): 46. CrossRef
Presidential address: How to cope with the present environment of scholarly journal publishing
Sun Huh
Science Editing.2020; 7(1): 1. CrossRef

Training Material

How to archive scholarly journals from the Republic of Korea in the National Library of Korea: Sun Huh; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):171-174. Published online August 19, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.180

4,966 View
112 Download

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material: According to the policies of a number of indexing database agencies and the Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing 3rd version, archiving of scholarly journal articles is mandatory for editors and publishers. Furthermore, publishers in Korea have been required to deposit journal article files in the National Library of Korea since February 2016 by law. This study presents background information on archiving sites and how to deposit digital files in the Library’s archive. Although some archiving sites for scholarly journals have been developed internationally, it may be burdensome for publishers in Korea (almost all of which are academic societies) to use those sites to deposit digital files because a deposit fee is required by some agencies. Furthermore, PubMed Central, maintained by the United States National Library of Medicine, accepts only English-language biomedical journals. In contrast, it is possible for publishers to deposit articles in the National Library of Korea by uploading files without any fees, regardless of the journal language. Furthermore, publishers can select the access policy of their journals. All journal publishers and editors in Korea are recommended to utilize the archiving site of the National Library of Korea to preserve their journal articles.

Original Articles

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

6,998 View
127 Download
8 Web of Science
7 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
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

Korean medical students’ knowledge about and attitudes towards plagiarism according to their commission of plagiarism: Man Sup Lim, Sun Huh; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):106-111. Published online August 19, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.170

5,741 View
153 Download
1 Web of Science
1 Crossref

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material

Purpose: This study investigated Korean medical students’ knowledge about and attitudes towards plagiarism according to their commission of plagiarism. Furthermore, the institutional environment regarding plagiarism was assessed.
Methods
A questionnaire provided by Turnitin was distributed to 67 first-year medical students of Hallym University, Korea in December 17, 2015 through SurveyMonkey, a web survey platform. Of the 67 subjects, responses from 60 students (89.6%) were analyzed with descriptive statistics and a comparative analysis.
Results
The respondents’ average knowledge level about plagiarism, measured as the item difficulty index for the relevant 8 items, was 0.658 (maximum 1). More than half did not know where they could find guidance about how to reference others’ work. They were only a little confident (41.7%) or not confident (11.7%) in referencing others’ work. They felt that plagiarism was not dealt with seriously at the university (53.3%). Eighty percent of students wanted their instructors to use text-matching software to check students’ work, and many of them thought that text-matching software helps them to spend more time making sure that references are correct (48.3%). Forty-six (75.4%) students reported having copied and pasted from the internet for their work without citing the original work. There were no significant differences in knowledge about plagiarism, attitudes towards classmates who plagiarize, or recommended actions against classmates who plagiarize according to whether students had committed plagiarism.
Conclusion
The medical students’ knowledge about plagiarism was insufficient. This medical school should introduce more intensive training on how to correctly reference others’ work and on the concept of plagiarism.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Integrity of clinical research conduct, reporting, publishing, and post-publication promotion in rheumatology
Durga Prasanna Misra, Vikas Agarwal
Clinical Rheumatology.2020; 39(4): 1049. CrossRef

First
Prev
Page of 3
Next
Last

Search