Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Science Editing : Science Editing

OPEN ACCESS
SEARCH
Search

Search

Page Path
HOME > Search
46 "Publishing"
Filter
Filter
Article category
Keywords
Publication year
Authors
Funded articles
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
  • 1,082 View
  • 41 Download
AbstractAbstract 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.
Review
Trends in research on ChatGPT and adoption-related issues discussed in articles: a narrative review
Sang-Jun Kim
Sci Ed. 2024;11(1):3-11.   Published online December 18, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.321
  • 3,537 View
  • 115 Download
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
This review aims to provide guidance for those contemplating the use of ChatGPT, by sharing research trends and evaluation results discussed in various articles. For an objective and quantitative analysis, 1,105 articles published over a 7-month period, from December 2022 to June 2023, following the release of ChatGPT were collected. These articles were sourced from PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Additionally, 140 research articles were selected, including archived preprints and Korean articles, to evaluate the performance of ChatGPT. The analysis of research trends revealed that related communities are rapidly and actively responding: the educational community is redefining its directions, the copyright and patent community is monitoring lawsuits related to artificial intelligence creations, the government is establishing laws to regulate and prevent potential harm, the journal publishing community is setting standards for whether artificial intelligence can be considered an author, and the medical community is publishing numerous articles exploring the potential of ChatGPT to support medical experts. A comparative analysis of research articles on ChatGPT’s performance suggests that it could serve as a valuable assistant in human intellectual activities and academic processes. However, its practical application requires careful consideration to overcome certain limitations. Both the general public and researchers should assess the adoption of ChatGPT based on accurate information, such as that provided in this review.
Original Articles
Impact factor surge in Korean medical journals during the COVID-19 era: a bibliometric study
Chansu Park, Sejin Park, Hyeonseok Seo, Janghyeog Oh, Dongryeong Kim, Junha Kang, Hanul Kang, Hyunsung Kang, Yaechan Kim, Mi Ah Han
Sci Ed. 2024;11(1):55-61.   Published online December 18, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.320
  • 2,212 View
  • 60 Download
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
Purpose: The multiyear COVID-19 pandemic has affected the volume and speed of publications in scientific journals. This study evaluated trends in the impact measures of international medical journals published in Korea, including the journal impact factor (JIF).
Methods
We selected Science Citation Index Expanded journals with the country/region set to Korea and the academic category classified as “clinical medicine” in Journal Citation Reports. Trends in indicators such as the JIF and Journal Citation Indicator (JCI) were assessed for journals with JIF information from 2018 to 2022. Ratios and differences between the measures were calculated to determine the extent of the change.
Results
We identified 43 journals, and the average JIF of those journals increased from 2.33 in 2018 and 2.50 in 2019 to 3.45 in 2020 and 3.86 in 2021. Other measures, such as the 5-year JIF and JCI, steadily increased, and the proportion of gold open access journals also increased significantly. However, the JCI and Eigenfactor scores remained steady or showed relatively small increases. Furthermore, impact measures declined in 2022, including a JIF decrease to 3.55.
Conclusion
We presented trends in quantitative measurements for international medical journals in Korea, and found an overall increase. Journals need to maintain a rigorous publication process to improve the quality of their research and the research community needs to exercise caution when using quantitative measures to evaluate journals. Further research is required to examine the quantitative indicators of journals, including their publication policies, research topics, and long-term trends.
Publishing trends of journals and articles in Journal Citation Reports during the COVID-19 pandemic: a descriptive study
Sang-Jun Kim, Kay Sook Park
Sci Ed. 2023;10(1):78-86.   Published online February 16, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.300
  • 2,631 View
  • 264 Download
  • 2 Web of Science
  • 1 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the changes that occurred in journal and article publishing during the noncontact period that started in 2020 due to COVID-19.
Methods
The integrated journal list in Journal Citation Reports (JCR) 2017–2021 and the search results of Web of Science were analyzed using pivot tables in Microsoft Excel. The articles, citations, impact factor (IF), publishers, open access (OA) status, and compound annual growth rate (CAGR) were investigated using the data.
Results
The CAGRs of articles, citations, and IFs in JCR journals increased throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, the increase in OA articles was accompanied by a decreasing share of subscription articles. The top 20 journals in JCR-SCIE (Science Citation Index Expanded), based on the number of articles, accepted OA policies and showed a strong influence, accounting for 7% to 9% of all articles. MDPI and Frontiers were OA publishers included among the top 10 publishers. Large publishers maintained their competitiveness through mergers and acquisitions with OA publishers. Due to the rapid distribution of OA and early access articles as part of the international response to overcome COVID-19, the CAGRs of citations and IFs increased more than that of articles, and the publication and use of journal articles have become more active.
Conclusion
The publication and use trends in JCR journals analyzed herein will provide useful information for researchers’ selection of journals for article submission, analyses of research performance, and libraries’ journal subscription contracts.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Trends in research on ChatGPT and adoption-related issues discussed in articles: a narrative review
    Sang-Jun Kim
    Science Editing.2023; 11(1): 3.     CrossRef
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
  • 2,031 View
  • 233 Download
  • 1 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDF
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
How open access diamond journals comply with industry standards exemplified by Plan S technical requirements
Sci Ed. 2023;10(1):35-44.   Published online February 16, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.295
  • 4,215 View
  • 262 Download
  • 1 Web of Science
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
Purpose: This study investigated how well current open access (OA) diamond journals in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and a survey conform to Plan S requirements, including licenses, peer review, author copyright, unique article identifiers, digital archiving, and machine-readable licenses.
Methods
Data obtained from DOAJ journals and surveyed journals from mid-June to mid-July 2020 were analyzed for a variety of Plan S requirements. The results were presented using descriptive statistics.
Results
Out of 1,465 journals that answered, 1,137 (77.0%) reported compliance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) principles. The peer review types used by OA diamond journals were double-blind (6,339), blind (2,070), peer review (not otherwise specified, 1,879), open peer review (42), and editorial review (118) out of 10,449 DOAJ journals. An author copyright retention policy was adopted by 5,090 out of 10,448 OA diamond journals (48.7%) in DOAJ. Of the unique article identifiers, 5,702 (54.6%) were digital object identifiers, 58 (0.6%) were handles, and 14 (0.1%) were uniform resource names, while 4,675 (44.7%) used none. Out of 1,619 surveyed journals, the archiving solutions were national libraries (n=170, 10.5%), Portico (n=67, 4.1%), PubMed Central (n=15, 0.9%), PKP PN (n=91, 5.6%), LOCKSS (n=136, 8.4%), CLOCKSS (n=87, 5.4%), the National Computing Center for Higher Education (n=6, 0.3%), others (n=69, 4.3%), no policy (n=855, 52.8%), and no reply (n=123, 7.6%). Article-level metadata deposition was done by 8,145 out of 10,449 OA diamond journals (78.0%) in DOAJ.
Conclusion
OA diamond journals’ compliance with industry standards exemplified by the Plan S technical requirements was insufficient, except for the peer review type.
Impact and perceived value of the revolutionary advent of artificial intelligence in research and publishing among researchers: a survey-based descriptive study
Riya Thomas, Uttkarsha Bhosale, Kriti Shukla, Anupama Kapadia
Sci Ed. 2023;10(1):27-34.   Published online February 16, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.294
  • 3,374 View
  • 336 Download
  • 1 Web of Science
  • 1 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
Purpose: This study was conducted to understand the perceptions and awareness of artificial intelligence (AI) in the academic publishing landscape.
Methods
We conducted a global survey entitled “Role and impact of AI on the future of academic publishing” to understand the impact of the AI wave in the scholarly publishing domain. This English-language survey was open to all researchers, authors, editors, publishers, and other stakeholders in the scholarly community. Conducted between August and October 2021, the survey received responses from around 212 universities across 54 countries.
Results
Out of 365 respondents, about 93% belonged to the age groups of 18–34 and 35–54 years. While 50% of the respondents selected plagiarism detection as the most widely known AI-based application, image recognition (42%), data analytics (40%), and language enhancement (39%) were some other known applications of AI. The respondents also expressed the opinion that the academic publishing landscape will significantly benefit from AI. However, the major challenges restraining the large-scale adoption of AI, as expressed by 93% of the respondents, were limited knowledge and expertise, as well as difficulties in integrating AI-based solutions into existing IT infrastructure.
Conclusion
The survey responses reflected the necessity of AI in research and publishing. This study suggests possible ways to support a smooth transition. This can be best achieved by educating and creating awareness to ease possible fears and hesitation, and to actualize the promising benefits of AI.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • The impact of generative AI tools on researchers and research: Implications for academia in higher education
    Abdulrahman M. Al-Zahrani
    Innovations in Education and Teaching International.2023; : 1.     CrossRef
Essay
Before you click “submit,” be your own first reviewer
Jean Iwaz
Sci Ed. 2023;10(1):105-108.   Published online November 16, 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.288
  • 3,119 View
  • 286 Download
AbstractAbstract PDF
For various reasons, despite previous linguistic, formatting, and other checks, beginner-authored or multi-authored manuscripts may be rushed to submission while lacking consistency. This article provides a clear outline of the final round of checks for section consistency, subsection consistency, and overall coherence that a scientific manuscript should undergo before submission. Checks for consistency should target the following: consistency between full and short titles; the exact answer in conclusion to research objectives (questions) and matching between methods and results in the abstract; consistency from a comprehensive view of the research field to the announcement of a single specific objective in the introduction section; coherence between methods and results sections and between results and illustrations in the rest of the text; and, recalls of the objective, the results, and the conclusions in the discussion section. Finally, consistency should be ensured between the various sections of the abstract and those of the manuscript, with the ideal abstract being a true miniature of the manuscript. An original figure provides a handy visual checklist authors might use to implement and achieve manuscript drafting. This round of checks increases readability, comprehensibility, confidence in the results, and the credibility of the authors. Subsequently, confidence and credibility will increase the probability of publication and the visibility of a whole team’s work.
Training Material
Open-source code to convert Journal Article Tag Suite Extensible Markup Language (JATS XML) to various viewers and other XML types for scholarly journal publishing
Younsang Cho
Sci Ed. 2022;9(2):162-168.   Published online August 19, 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.284
  • 2,797 View
  • 236 Download
  • 3 Web of Science
  • 2 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
There are many ways to use open source code to implement digital standards for scholarly journal publishing. However, providing digital services using open-source code can be a challenge, especially for small and local academic society journals. This paper provides some critical examples of using some of the many open-source code resources available to the public. Journal Article Tag Suite (JATS) Extensible Markup Language (XML) has been established as an essential tool, and is now used by most journals for digital publication. JATS XML can be converted to other viewer formats, including Extensible Hypertext Markup Language, PubReader, and EPUB 3.0. It can also be used to create dynamic interactive PDFs. It can be converted to other XMLs, incluing Crossref XML, PubMed XML, and DOAJ XML. Open-source code published on GitHub, National Information Standards Organization, and the US National Library of Medicine can be used for Crossref XML deposition for digital object identifier and Crossmark stamp registration. These examples of open-source code need to be implemented on journal websites to provide local academic journal publishers with various critical functions. This paper provides instructions on the best ways to realize these digital standards so that journal content can be provided to readers in a more friendly and effective way.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Artificial intelligence in scholarly publishing and the role of the Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors in the Asia-Pacific region
    Young Yoo
    Science Editing.2024; 11(1): 77.     CrossRef
  • Why do editors of local nursing society journals strive to have their journals included in MEDLINE? A case study of the Korean Journal of Women Health Nursing
    Sun Huh
    Korean Journal of Women Health Nursing.2023; 29(3): 147.     CrossRef
Original Articles
Charting variety, scope, and impact of open access diamond journals in various disciplines and regions: a survey-based observational study
Sci Ed. 2022;9(2):120-135.   Published online August 19, 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.277
  • 3,930 View
  • 292 Download
  • 4 Web of Science
  • 4 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
Purpose: The variety, scope, and impact of open access (OA) diamond journals across disciplines and regions from July 22 to September 11, 2020 were charted to characterize the current OA diamond landscape.
Methods
The total number of diamond journals was estimated, including those outside the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). The distribution across regions, disciplines, and publisher types was described. The scope of journals in terms of authorship and readership was investigated. Information was collected on linguistic diversity, journal dynamics and life cycle, and their visibility in scholarly databases.
Results
The number of OA diamond journals is estimated to be 29,000. OA diamond journals are estimated to publish 356,000 articles per year. The OA diamond sector is diverse in terms of regions (45% in Europe, 25% in Latin America, 16% in Asia, and 5% in the United States/Canada) and disciplines (60% humanities and social sciences, 22% sciences, and 17% medicine). More than 70% of OA diamond journals are published by university-owned publishers, including university presses. The majority of OA diamond journals are small, publishing fewer than 25 articles a year. English (1,210), Spanish (492), and French (342) are the most common languages of the main texts. Out of 1,619 journals, 1,025 (63.3%) are indexed in DOAJ, 492 (30.4%) in Scopus, and 321 (19.8%) in Web of Science.
Conclusion
The patterns and trends reported herein provide insights into the diversity and importance of the OA diamond journal landscape and the accompanying opportunities and challenges in supporting this publishing model.

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
  • How open access diamond journals comply with industry standards exemplified by Plan S technical requirements

    Science Editing.2023; 10(1): 35.     CrossRef
  • Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions received the Journal Impact Factor, 4.4 for the first time on June 28, 2023
    Sun Huh
    Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2023; 20: 21.     CrossRef
  • Plan S: estimating future developments
    Johan Rooryck
    Science Editing.2022; 9(2): 149.     CrossRef
Science beyond English: to what extent do Vietnamese scholars publish in non-English languages?
Van Luong Nguyen, Dinh-Hai Luong, Hiep-Hung Pham
Sci Ed. 2022;9(2):105-111.   Published online August 19, 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.275
  • 2,517 View
  • 271 Download
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
Purpose: Although English has become the lingua franca for scholarly communication, scholars worldwide publish in other languages. Nevertheless, few studies have answered the question, “To what extent do scholars publish in non-English languages?” This study addresses that question, limiting its scope to Vietnamese scholars.
Methods
We reviewed 833 non-English documents authored by at least one scholar from Vietnam between 1960 and 2021, exploring aspects such as the language of the publication, the year of publication, the document type, number of document citations, the most prolific and most cited authors, and the primary research themes.
Results
Among non-English languages, French, Russian, and Chinese were the three most often selected by Vietnamese scholars for their publications. The year 2015 was a pivotal year when non-English publications from Vietnam significantly increased. Journal articles were the most common type of document, and the most frequent subject areas were medicine, agricultural and biological sciences, engineering, energy, and environmental science.
Conclusion
Although English is the primary language of science, the number of non-English documents by Vietnamese researchers has been increasing. This suggests that collaborative work between Vietnamese researchers and foreign researchers has also increased.
Training Material
The evolution, benefits, and challenges of preprints and their interaction with journals
Pippa Smart
Sci Ed. 2022;9(1):79-84.   Published online February 20, 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.269
  • 4,900 View
  • 306 Download
  • 8 Web of Science
  • 12 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDF
This article presents the growth and development of preprints to help authors, editors, and publishers understand and adopt appropriate strategies for incorporating preprints within their scholarly communication strategies. The article considers: preprint history and evolution, integration of preprints and journals, and the benefits and disadvantages, and challenges that preprints offer. The article discusses the two largest and most established preprint servers, arXiv.org (established in 1991) and SSRN (1994), the OSF (Open Science Foundation) initiative that supported preprint growth (2010), bioRxiv (2013), and medRxiv (2019). It then discusses six different levels of acceptance of preprints within journals: uneasy relationship, acceptance of preprint articles, encouraging authors to preprint their articles, active participation with preprints, submerger by reviewing preprints, and finally merger and overlay models. It is notable that most journals now accept submissions that have been posted as preprints. The benefits of preprints include fast circulation, priority publication, increased visibility, community feedback, and contribution to open science. Disadvantages include information overload, inadequate quality assurance, citation dilution, information manipulation and inflation of results. As preprints become mainstream it is likely that they will benefit authors but disadvantage publishers and journals. Authors are encouraged to preprint their own articles but to be cautious about using preprints as the basis for their own research. Editors are encouraged to develop preprint policies and be aware that double-blind review is not possible with preprinting of articles and that allowing citations to preprints is to be encouraged. In conclusion, journal-related stakeholders should consider preprints as an unavoidable development, taking into consideration both the benefits and disadvantages.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Seeing the forest for the trees and the changing seasons in the vast land of scholarly publishing
    Soo Jung Shin
    Science Editing.2024; 11(1): 81.     CrossRef
  • To preprint or not to preprint: A global researcher survey
    Rong Ni, Ludo Waltman
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Open publishing of public health research in Africa: an exploratory investigation of the barriers and solutions
    Pasipanodya Ian Machingura Ruredzo, Dominic Dankwah Agyei, Modibo Sangare, Richard F. Heller
    Insights the UKSG journal.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Recent Issues in Medical Journal Publishing and Editing Policies: Adoption of Artificial Intelligence, Preprints, Open Peer Review, Model Text Recycling Policies, Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing 4th Version, and Country Names in Titles
    Sun Huh
    Neurointervention.2023; 18(1): 2.     CrossRef
  • Most Preprint Servers Allow the Publication of Opinion Papers
    Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, Serhii Nazarovets
    Open Information Science.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • The rise of preprints in earth sciences
    Olivier Pourret, Daniel Enrique Ibarra
    F1000Research.2023; 12: 561.     CrossRef
  • The rise of preprints in earth sciences
    Olivier Pourret, Daniel Enrique Ibarra
    F1000Research.2023; 12: 561.     CrossRef
  • Sharing the wealth: a proposal for discipline-based repositories of shared educational resources
    Ellen Austin
    Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education.2023; 27(4): 131.     CrossRef
  • The experiences of COVID-19 preprint authors: a survey of researchers about publishing and receiving feedback on their work during the pandemic
    Narmin Rzayeva, Susana Oliveira Henriques, Stephen Pinfield, Ludo Waltman
    PeerJ.2023; 11: e15864.     CrossRef
  • An attempt to explain the partial 'silent' withdrawal or retraction of a SAGE Advance preprint
    Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva
    Publishing Research.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • 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
  • Dissemination of Registered COVID-19 Clinical Trials (DIRECCT): a cross-sectional study
    Maia Salholz-Hillel, Molly Pugh-Jones, Nicole Hildebrand, Tjada A. Schult, Johannes Schwietering, Peter Grabitz, Benjamin Gregory Carlisle, Ben Goldacre, Daniel Strech, Nicholas J. DeVito
    BMC Medicine.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
Original Article
Korean researchers’ motivations for publishing in data journals and the usefulness of their data: a qualitative study
Jungyeoun Lee, Jihyun Kim
Sci Ed. 2021;8(2):145-152.   Published online August 20, 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.246
  • 3,677 View
  • 184 Download
  • 2 Web of Science
  • 2 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDF
Purpose: This study investigated the usefulness and limitations of data journals by analyzing motivations for submission, review and publication processes according to researchers with experience publishing in data journals.
Methods
Among 79 data journals indexed in Web of Science, we selected four data journals where data papers accounted for more than 20% of the publication volume and whose corresponding authors belonged to South Korean research institutes. A qualitative analysis was conducted of the subjective experiences of seven corresponding authors who agreed to participate in interviews. To analyze interview transcriptions, clusters were created by restructuring the theme nodes using Nvivo 12.
Results
The most important element of data journals to researchers was their usefulness for obtaining credit for research performance. Since the data in repositories linked to data papers are screened using journals’ review processes, the validity, accuracy, reusability, and reliability of data are ensured. In addition, data journals provide a basis for data sharing using repositories and data-centered follow-up research using citations and offer detailed descriptions of data.
Conclusion
Data journals play a leading role in data-centered research. Data papers are recognized as research achievements through citations in the same way as research papers published in conventional journals, but there was also a perception that it is difficult to attain a similar level of academic recognition with data papers as with research papers. However, researchers highly valued the usefulness of data journals, and data journals should thus be developed into new academic communication channels that enhance data sharing and reuse.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Development and validation of the motivation to publish scale-scientific articles (EMP-AC) for Peruvian university students
    Oscar Mamani-Benito, Julio Torres-Miranda, Edison Effer Apaza-Tarqui, Madona Tito-Betancur, Wilter C. Morales-García, Josué Edison Turpo-Chaparro
    Frontiers in Education.2023;[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
Review
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
Sci Ed. 2021;8(2):134-144.   Published online July 27, 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.244
  • 18,062 View
  • 623 Download
  • 12 Web of Science
  • 12 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDF
The flood of research output and increasing demands for peer reviewers have necessitated the intervention of artificial intelligence (AI) in scholarly publishing. Although human input is seen as essential for writing publications, the contribution of AI slowly and steadily moves ahead. AI may redefine the role of science communication experts in the future and transform the scholarly publishing industry into a technology-driven one. It can prospectively improve the quality of publishable content and identify errors in published content. In this article, we review various AI and other associated tools currently in use or development for a range of publishing obligations and functions that have brought about or can soon leverage much-demanded advances in scholarly communications. Several AI-assisted tools, with diverse scope and scale, have emerged in the scholarly market. AI algorithms develop summaries of scientific publications and convert them into plain-language texts, press statements, and news stories. Retrieval of accurate and sufficient information is prominent in evidence-based science publications. Semantic tools may empower transparent and proficient data extraction tactics. From detecting simple plagiarism errors to predicting the projected citation impact of an unpublished article, AI’s role in scholarly publishing is expected to be multidimensional. AI, natural language processing, and machine learning in scholarly publishing have arrived for writers, editors, authors, and publishers. They should leverage these technologies to enable the fast and accurate dissemination of scientific information to contribute to the betterment of humankind.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Navigating the impact: a study of editors’ and proofreaders’ perceptions of AI tools in editing and proofreading
    Islam Al Sawi, Ahmed Alaa
    Discover Artificial Intelligence.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Beyond Plagiarism: ChatGPT as the Vanguard of Technological Revolution in Research and Citation
    Hanni B. Flaherty, Jackson Yurch
    Research on Social Work Practice.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Recent Issues in Medical Journal Publishing and Editing Policies: Adoption of Artificial Intelligence, Preprints, Open Peer Review, Model Text Recycling Policies, Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing 4th Version, and Country Names in Titles
    Sun Huh
    Neurointervention.2023; 18(1): 2.     CrossRef
  • Artificial intelligence-assisted medical writing: With greater power comes greater responsibility
    Rhythm Bains
    Asian Journal of Oral Health and Allied Sciences.2023; 13: 2.     CrossRef
  • Emergence of the metaverse and ChatGPT in journal publishing after the COVID-19 pandemic
    Sun Huh
    Science Editing.2023; 10(1): 1.     CrossRef
  • Author-Profile-Based Journal Recommendation for a Candidate Article: Using Hybrid Semantic Similarity and Trend Analysis
    Mehmet Yașar Bayraktar, Mehmet Kaya
    IEEE Access.2023; 11: 45826.     CrossRef
  • Utilization of artificial intelligence technology in an academic writing class: How do Indonesian students perceive?
    Santi Pratiwi Tri Utami, Andayani Andayani, Retno Winarni, Sumarwati Sumarwati
    Contemporary Educational Technology.2023; 15(4): ep450.     CrossRef
  • The impact of generative AI tools on researchers and research: Implications for academia in higher education
    Abdulrahman M. Al-Zahrani
    Innovations in Education and Teaching International.2023; : 1.     CrossRef
  • Slow Writing with ChatGPT: Turning the Hype into a Right Way Forward
    Chitnarong Sirisathitkul
    Postdigital Science and Education.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Editorial policies of Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions on the use of generative artificial intelligence in article writing and peer review
    Sun Huh
    Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2023; 20: 40.     CrossRef
  • Current Status of Neurointervention, the Official Journal of the Korean Society of Interventional Neuroradiology
    Dae Chul Suh, Sun Huh
    Neurointervention.2022; 17(2): 67.     CrossRef
  • Profiles of Technology Use and Plagiarism in High School Education
    Juan Carlos Torres-Diaz, Pablo Vicente Torres Carrión, Isidro Marín Gutierrez
    SSRN Electronic Journal .2021;[Epub]     CrossRef
Original Article
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
  • 5,032 View
  • 150 Download
  • 5 Web of Science
  • 6 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary 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

Science Editing : Science Editing