Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Science Editing : Science Editing

OPEN ACCESS
SEARCH
Search

Search

Page Path
HOME > Search
3 "Standards"
Filter
Filter
Article category
Keywords
Publication year
Authors
Funded articles
Training Material
What to tell and never tell a reviewer
Jean Iwaz
Sci Ed. 2023;10(2):181-185.   Published online April 28, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.305
  • 3,848 View
  • 224 Download
AbstractAbstract PDF
The specialized literature abounds in recommendations about the most desirable technical ways of answering reviewers’ comments on a submitted manuscript. However, not all publications mention authors’ and/or reviewers’ feelings or reactions about what they may read or write in their respective reports, and even fewer publications tackle openly what may or may not be said in a set of answers to a reviewer’s comments. In answering reviewers’ comments, authors are often attentive to the technical or rational aspects of the task but might forget some of its relational aspects. In their answers, authors are expected to make every effort to abide by reviewers’ suggestions, including discussing major criticisms, editing the illustrations, or implementing minor corrections; abstain from questioning a reviewer’s competence or willingness to write a good review, including full and attentive reading and drafting useful comments; clearly separate their answers to each reviewer; avoid skipping, merging, or reordering reviewers’ comments; and, finally, specify the changes made. Authors are advised to call on facts, logic, and some diplomacy, but never on artifice, concealment, or flattery. Failing to do so erodes the trust between authors and reviewers, whereas integrity is expected and highly valued. The guiding principle should always be honesty.
Original Articles
Status of digital standards, licensing types, and archiving policies in Asian open access journals registered in Directory of Open Access Journals
Soon Kim, Hyungwook Choi
Sci Ed. 2019;6(1):41-46.   Published online February 20, 2019
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.154
  • 7,978 View
  • 154 Download
  • 3 Web of Science
  • 3 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDF
Purpose
This study aims to analyze the digital standards of Asian journals registered in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) which has been recognized as an index of quality for open access journals.
Methods
Data including 54 fields of each journal listed in DOAJ were provided by the DOAJ team in June 5, 2018. We focused on 11 fields including digital standards, content licensing types and digital archiving policy.
Results
Based on raw data from DOAJ from June 5, 2018, there are 11,534 journals registered in the directory. Among all journals in the directory, Asian journals comprise 1,972 journals from 18 countries. Indonesian journals rank at the top for Asian journals, with 1,322 journals originating from that country. Other major Asian countries’ registration status includes India (238), South Korea (82), China (80), Malaysia (45), Pakistan (39), Taiwan (30), Thailand (27), Japan (20), and Hong Kong (20). Eighty percent of journals (1,584) are using PDF-only as their full-text format, and DOI is adopted in 852 journals (43%). Almost 98% of journals (1,936) are having a Creative Commons license; however, 85% of journals (1,689) do not have a digital archiving policy.
Conclusion
Generally, digital standards are well implemented in South Korea, and digital archiving/deposit policy is well accepted in Indian journals. Many Asian open access journal editors can refer to this study result when they digitalize their journals in order to meet global standards.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Digital Archiving Policies of Central European Journals Registered in the Directory of Open Access Journals
    Branka Marijanović, Hrvoje Stančić
    Libri.2023; 73(1): 11.     CrossRef
  • 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
    Science Editing.2022; 9(2): 162.     CrossRef
  • Compliance of “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing” in academic society published journals
    Hyung Wook Choi, Ye Jin Choi, Soon Kim
    Science Editing.2019; 6(2): 112.     CrossRef
Status of digital standards in Korean medical journals in 2016
Geum Hee Jeong, Sun Huh
Sci Ed. 2016;3(2):100-104.   Published online August 20, 2016
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.73
  • 10,831 View
  • 154 Download
  • 13 Web of Science
  • 14 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
This study aimed to characterize the current status of a variety of digital standards in medical journals published in Korea in 2016. A total of 256 journals listed as member journals of the Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors were searched to evaluate the following items: an independent journal homepage domain; an e-submission system; the use of digital object identifiers (DOIs), CrossMark, and FundRef; the availability of text and data mining; the presence of Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) information, an open access declaration, and the language of the journal. The search was carried out from July 29 to 30, 2016. Independent journal homepage domains were found for 190 of the 256 journals (74.1%). Of the journals, 216 were equipped with an e-submission system (84.4%), and 218 journals used DOIs (85.2%). CrossMark and FundRef were used in 105 journals (41.0%), text and data mining were available for 31 journals (11.1%), ORCID identifiers were present in 24 journals (9.4%), and an open access declaration according to a Creative Commons license was present for 199 journals (77.8%). The number of English-language journals was 130 (50.8%). Open access journals and English-language journals were found to have implemented more digital standards than non-open access journals and Korean-language journals respectively. The above results demonstrate that digital standards have been rapidly implemented by a considerable number of medical journals in Korea. In order to facilitate the more active promotion of journals to the international level, more journals should utilize these standards. The use of full-text JATS (journal article tag suite) XML is recommended for the easy adoption of DOIs, CrossMark, FundRef, and ORCID.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Medical and health sciences academics’ behaviours and attitudes towards open access publishing in scholarly journals: a perspective from South Korea
    Kyoung Hee Joung, Jennifer Rowley, Laura Sbaffi
    Information Development.2019; 35(2): 191.     CrossRef
  • Is it possible to foster first-rate publishers through a journal publishing cooperative in Korea?
    Sun Huh
    Archives of Plastic Surgery.2019; 46(01): 3.     CrossRef
  • Bronze, free, or fourrée: an open access commentary
    Eamon Costello
    Science Editing.2019; 6(1): 69.     CrossRef
  • Status of digital standards, licensing types, and archiving policies in Asian open access journals registered in Directory of Open Access Journals
    Soon Kim, Hyungwook Choi
    Science Editing.2019; 6(1): 41.     CrossRef
  • 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
    Science Editing.2019; 6(2): 122.     CrossRef
  • How much progress has Blood Research made since the change of the journal title in 2013
    Sun Huh
    Blood Research.2018; 53(2): 95.     CrossRef
  • Journal metrics of Clinical and Molecular Hepatology based on the Web of Science Core Collection
    Sun Huh
    Clinical and Molecular Hepatology.2018; 24(2): 137.     CrossRef
  • Recent advances of medical journals in Korea and and further development strategies: Is it possible for them to publish Nobel Prize-winning research?
    Sun Huh
    Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2018; 61(9): 524.     CrossRef
  • Is Diabetes & Metabolism Journal Eligible to Be Indexed in MEDLINE?
    Sun Huh
    Diabetes & Metabolism Journal.2018; 42(6): 472.     CrossRef
  • The great rise ofIntestinal Researchas an international journal 3 years after its language change to English as evidenced by journal metrics
    Geum Hee Jeong, Sun Huh
    Intestinal Research.2017; 15(1): 1.     CrossRef
  • The rapid internationalization of Annals of Pediatric Endocrinology & Metabolism as evidenced by journal metrics
    Sun Huh
    Annals of Pediatric Endocrinology & Metabolism.2017; 22(2): 77.     CrossRef
  • Clinical and Experimental Vaccine Research's promotion to internationally competitive journal evidenced by journal metrics
    Sun Huh
    Clinical and Experimental Vaccine Research.2017; 6(2): 67.     CrossRef
  • How to successfully list a journal in the Social Science Citation Index or Science Citation Index Expanded
    Sun Huh
    Korean Journal of Medical Education.2017; 29(4): 221.     CrossRef
  • Bibliometric and content analysis of medical articles in the PubMed database published by North Korean authors from 1997 to July 2017
    Geum Hee Jeong, Sun Huh
    Science Editing.2017; 4(2): 70.     CrossRef

Science Editing : Science Editing