Editorials have earned a special place among many practices, tools, and policies available to editors for journal advancement. Despite the vital and diverse roles of editorials in academic journals, they have rarely been systematically analysed for common characteristics or patterns. In this study, I approached editorials as a leadership practice of journal editors. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to understand how editors use editorials to lead their journals. To render a manageable set of editorials and, at the same time, to capture the latest trends, I focused on editorials published in 2022 in top journals in the field of organizational behaviour/human resource management indexed by Scopus. The sample consisted of 120 editorials found in 103 journals managed by 21 publishers. I analysed the editorials using qualitative content analysis that was guided by two research questions: (1) How commonly do editors use editorials? (2) What objectives do editors pursue in their editorials? The analyses showed that editorials appear to be neither a regular nor a common practice. An overwhelming majority of editorials were written to validate existing knowledge. The findings raise several important issues, including an unclear contribution of editorials, perceived or factual, to academic journals and the editor's role in the journal development process. Journal editors, editorial board members, publishers, universities, and organizations associated with journals should consider revisiting their policies and practices to ensure a purposeful, meaningful, and systematic use of editorials.
Funders, publishers, scholarly societies, universities, and other stakeholders need to be able to track the impact of programs and policies designed to advance data sharing and reuse. With the launch of the NIH data management and sharing policy in 2023, establishing a pre-policy baseline of sharing and reuse activity is critical for the biological and biomedical community. Toward this goal, we tested the utility of mentions of research resources, databases, and repositories (RDRs) as a proxy measurement of data sharing and reuse. We captured and processed text from Methods sections of open access biological and biomedical research articles published in 2020 and 2021 and made available in PubMed Central. We used natural language processing to identify text strings to measure RDR mentions. In this article, we demonstrate our methodology, provide normalized baseline data sharing and reuse activity in this community, and highlight actions authors and publishers can take to encourage data sharing and reuse practices.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：