Purpose This study analyzed the peer review systems, criteria, and editorial committee structures of data journals, aiming to determine the current state of data peer review and to offer suggestions.
Methods We analyzed peer review systems and criteria for peer review in nine data journals indexed by Web of Science, as well as the positions of the editorial committee members of the journals. Each data journal’s website was initially surveyed, and the editors-in-chief were queried via email about any information not found on the websites. The peer review criteria of the journals were analyzed in terms of data quality, metadata quality, and general quality.
Results Seven of the nine data journals adopted single-blind and open review peer review methods. The remaining two implemented modified models, such as interactive and community review. In the peer review criteria, there was a shared emphasis on the appropriateness of data production methodology and detailed descriptions. The editorial committees of the journals tended to have subject editors or subject advisory boards, while a few journals included positions with the responsibility of evaluating the technical quality of data.
Conclusion Creating a community of subject experts and securing various editorial positions for peer review are necessary for data journals to achieve data quality assurance and to promote reuse. New practices will emerge in terms of data peer review models, criteria, and editorial positions, and further research needs to be conducted.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Unleashing the power of AI in science-key considerations for materials data preparation Yongchao Lu, Hong Wang, Lanting Zhang, Ning Yu, Siqi Shi, Hang Su Scientific Data.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Dissemination effect of data papers on scientific datasets Hong Jiao, Yuhong Qiu, Xiaowei Ma, Bo Yang Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology.2024; 75(2): 115. CrossRef
The data paper as a sociolinguistic epistemic object: A content analysis on the rhetorical moves used in data paper abstracts Kai Li, Chenyue Jiao Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology.2022; 73(6): 834. CrossRef
Korean researchers’ motivations for publishing in data journals and the usefulness of their data: a qualitative study Jungyeoun Lee, Jihyun Kim Science Editing.2021; 8(2): 145. CrossRef
To improve scholarly communications with scientists throughout the world, an international-level manuscript management system is indispensable. We analyzed the manuscript management systems currently in use in Korea and suggested ways to improve these domestic systems through benchmarking with representative overseas systems. Drawing information from the manufacturer’s documentation, we compared the functionalities of the major manuscript management systems available in Korea to international systems. Based on this analysis, we identified the essential elements necessary to meet international standards. The representative international systems provide an intuitive interface and an efficient communication channel for authors, editors, and reviewers, enabling them to save time. The two domestic paid systems are almost at the international level; however, the free systems developed in Korea need to be upgraded. In particular, more advanced visualization tools, more efficient tools for communication between stakeholders, and convenient linking to external content are needed. Studies of these manuscript management systems, which are essential for the internationalization of domestic journals, can be utilized as primary materials to improve the level of Korean academic journals in response to the rapid changes in modern scholarly communication.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Artificial intelligence to support publishing and peer review: A summary and review Kayvan Kousha, Mike Thelwall Learned Publishing.2024; 37(1): 4. CrossRef
Procesos editoriales en revistas científicas: Un análisis bibliométrico a partir de artículos en acceso abierto Elí Vicente Raudales-García , Wileidys Artigas, Benjamín Barón Velandia, Nicolás Sumba Nacipucha , Jorge Cueva Estrada Biblios Journal of Librarianship and Information Science.2024; (87): e008. CrossRef
Should publishers use online submission systems to harvest authors’ responses to diversity, equity and inclusion? J. A. Teixeira da Silva Science Editor and Publisher.2023; 7(2): 210. CrossRef
An Exploratory Study into Professional Scholarly Journals Publishing Software Adoption in Lithuania Vincas Grigas, Arūnas Gudinavičius, Tomas Petreikis, Andrius Šuminas Information & Media.2023; 96: 179. CrossRef
A Blockchain-Based Editorial Management System Eman-Yaser Daraghmi, Mamoun Abu Helou, Yousef-Awwad Daraghmi, omar cheikhrouhou Security and Communication Networks.2021; 2021: 1. CrossRef
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 Science Editing.2021; 8(2): 134. CrossRef
The “invisible hand” of peer review: The implications of author-referee networks on peer review in a scholarly journal Pierpaolo Dondio, Niccolò Casnici, Francisco Grimaldo, Nigel Gilbert, Flaminio Squazzoni Journal of Informetrics.2019; 13(2): 708. CrossRef