Science Editing

Original Articles

Comparison of the open access status and metrics of Scopus journals published in East Asian countries: a descriptive study: Eungi Kim, Da-Yeong Jeong; Sci Ed. 2023;10(1):57-63. Published online February 16, 2023; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.297

2,033 View
233 Download
1 Crossref

Purpose: The objective of this study was to compare Scopus journals published in East Asian countries—China, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan—in terms of their open access status and metrics and to explore the implications of those findings for South Korea.
Methods
To conduct this study, we selected four East Asian countries: China, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. We used journal information provided by SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) and Scopus. The following parameters were analyzed for journals published in East Asian countries: open access status, subject categories, quartiles, number of published documents, h-index, publishers, and citation rate.
Results
In all East Asian countries, numerous commercial publishers publish journals. One exception is Science Press, a Chinese government-sponsored publisher, which published the largest number of journals in the East Asian region. Japan had the highest median number of years covered by SJR. However, the proportion of Q1 journals in Japan was the lowest of the East Asian countries. South Korea had the highest proportion of Q1 journals in the country’s total journal production. Publishers in South Korea published more open access journals than any other East Asian country. Despite publishing a high proportion of prestigious journals, South Korea lagged behind China and Japan in the number of Scopus-indexed journals.
Conclusion
The findings indicate that South Korea has made significant progress in locally producing influential journals over the years. However, more efforts to publish international journals are required for South Korea to increase the number of Scopus journals.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

In-Depth Examination of Coverage Duration: Analyzing Years Covered and Skipped in Journal Indexing
Eungi Kim
Publications.2024; 12(2): 10. CrossRef

Status and factors associated with the adoption of data sharing policies in Asian journals: Jihyun Kim, Seo Young Bai; Sci Ed. 2022;9(2):97-104. Published online August 19, 2022; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.274

3,146 View
299 Download
2 Web of Science
1 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Purpose: This study investigated the current status and factors associated with adopting data sharing policies in Asian journals. Data sharing policies vary by country and region, and few studies have examined the trends and factors related to these policies in journals across the Asian region.
Methods
The 2020 Scimago Journal and Country Rank was used to download data about 1,143 Asian journals indexed in Web of Science. Excluding 40 journals inaccessible via the Internet or without English-language websites and author guidelines, 1,103 journals were analyzed through descriptive statistical analyses and the chi-square test.
Results
Of the 1,103 journals, 325 (29.5%) had data sharing policies, showing a moderate level of policy adoption among Asian journals. The results of the chi-square test suggested that the impact factor and publisher type (whether a publisher was commercial) were significantly associated with the presence of data sharing policies in journals, but subject categories were not identified as a significant factor. Regarding the strength of data sharing policies, most journals provided policies that only encouraged data sharing.
Conclusion
Policies only encouraging data sharing are unlikely to lead to actual data sharing; thus, considering varying levels of policy strength and effective ways to induce authors’ compliance with the policies is important. Further research needs to examine other factors affecting the presence or strength of data sharing policies.

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

Internal affairs: the fate of authors from the University of the Philippines accused of plagiarism, 1990s to 2010s: Miguel Paolo P. Reyes, Joel F. Ariate; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):128-136. Published online August 19, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.173

19,838 View
323 Download
1 Web of Science
1 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Purpose: This study centers on 25 cases of plagiarism in scientific publications committed by faculty members and students of the University of the Philippines and dealt with by eight of the university’s academic publishers.
Methods
We focus on the publishers’ responses to these cases, details of which we obtained from various sources, vis-à-vis the University of the Philippines’ policies on plagiarism.
Results
The responses to plagiarism were found to vary, at times seemingly arbitrarily, but tended toward protecting the identities or details of the accused, unless the case became publicized.
Conclusion
Such maintenance of confidentiality is inimical to the fulfillment of academic publishers’ duties to the rest of the academic community. We herein suggest policies to address the identified deficits.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Fragmented or centralized?: Comparative case study of ethical frameworks for social research in Philippines and Taiwan
Jayson Troy F. Bajar
International Journal of Ethics Education.2022; 7(2): 235. CrossRef

Review

The big picture: scholarly publishing trends 2014: Pippa Smart; Sci Ed. 2014;1(2):52-57. Published online August 18, 2014; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.2014.1.52

31,827 View
193 Download
11 Web of Science
9 Crossref

Abstract PDF

It is important for journal editors to keep up to date with the changes happening in the international journal environment to ensure that their own publications remain current and meet international expectations. Dramatic changes have taken place in the journals environment during the last two decades, frequently driven by technology but also by increased global participation in scholarly and scientific research and concern about the commercial influence on dissemination of knowledge. Technical solutions have attempted to address the growth in research but have sometimes added to the tsunami of information and increased the need to manage quality. To this end experiments with the traditional quality control and dissemination systems have been attempted, but news of improvements are frequently overshadowed by alarms about ethical problems. There is particular concern about some of the new publishers who are not adhering to established quality control and ethical practices. Within a potentially fragmenting system, however, there are also emerging collaborative projects helping to knit together the different elements of the publishing landscape to improve quality, linkages and access.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Global trend of clinical biomarkers of health and disease during the period (1913–2021): systematic review and bibliometric analysis
Snezana M. Jovicic
African Journal of Urology.2021;[Epub] CrossRef
Predatory publishing through McCornarck’s information manipulation theory
Harry Kipkemoi Bett
Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication.2020; 69(4/5): 331. CrossRef
Forecast of the Development of Russian Scientific Journals: The Publishers
O. V. Moskaleva, M. A. Akoev
Scholarly Research and Information.2020; 3(2-3): 131. CrossRef
English language policies in scientific journals: Signs of change in the field of economics
Ann C. Henshall
Journal of English for Academic Purposes.2018; 36: 26. CrossRef
How open access is crucial to the future of science: A reply
H. Charles Romesburg
The Journal of Wildlife Management.2017; 81(4): 567. CrossRef
Supply chain management 1982–2015: a review
Nasrin Asgari, Ehsan Nikbakhsh, Alex Hill, Reza Zanjirani Farahani
IMA Journal of Management Mathematics.2016; 27(3): 353. CrossRef
Topics of major current interest in scholarly editing and publishing based on the content analysis of selected journals
Yeonok Chung
Science Editing.2015; 2(2): 59. CrossRef
How Green Is This Paper?
Toby Miller
Culture Unbound.2015; 7(4): 588. CrossRef
What is the position ofClinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicinein its scholarly journal network based on journal metrics?
Sun Huh
Clinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicine.2014; 41(4): 147. CrossRef

First
Prev
Page of 1
Next
Last

Search