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
Purpose This study explored changes in the journal publishing market by publisher and access type using the major journals that publish about 95% of Journal Citation Reports (JCR) articles.
Methods From JCR 2016, 2018, and 2020, a unique journal list by publisher was created in Excel and used to analyze the compound annual growth rate by pivot tables. In total, 10,953 major JCR journals were analyzed, focusing on publisher type, open access (OA) status, and mega journals (publishing over 1,000 articles per year).
Results Among the 19 publishers that published over 10,000 articles per year, in JCR 2020, six large publishers published 59.6% of the articles and 13 publishers 22.5%. The other publishers published 17.9%. Large and OA publishers increased their article share through leading mega journals, but the remaining publishers showed the opposite tendency. In JCR 2020, mega journals had a 26.5% article share and an excellent distribution in terms of the Journal Impact Factor quartile. Despite the high growth (22.6%) and share (26.0%) of OA articles, the natural growth of non-OA articles (7.3%) and total articles (10.7%) caused a rise in journal subscription fees. Articles, citations, the impact factor, and the immediacy index all increased gradually, and the compound annual growth rate of the average immediacy index was almost double than that of the average impact factor in JCR 2020.
Conclusion The influence of OA publishers has grown under the dominance of large publishers, and mega journals may substantially change the journal market. Journal stakeholders should pay attention to these changes.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Publishing trends of journals and articles in Journal Citation Reports during the COVID-19 pandemic: a descriptive study Sang-Jun Kim, Kay Sook Park Science Editing.2023; 10(1): 78. CrossRef
Citation beneficiaries of discipline-specific mega-journals: who and how much Jing Li, Qiushuang Long, Xiaoli Lu, Dengsheng Wu Humanities and Social Sciences Communications.2023;[Epub] CrossRef