韩国编辑和研究人员对预印本的经验和对预印本政策的态度

IF 1.6 Q2 COMMUNICATION Science Editing Pub Date : 2021-02-20 DOI:10.6087/KCSE.223
H. Yi, Sun Huh
{"title":"韩国编辑和研究人员对预印本的经验和对预印本政策的态度","authors":"H. Yi, Sun Huh","doi":"10.6087/KCSE.223","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: This study investigated editors’ and researcher’s experiences with preprints and their attitudes towards preprint policies in Korea. Methods: From December 30, 2019 to January 10, 2020, a Google Forms survey was mailed to members of the Korean Council of Science Editors and the Korean Federation of Science and Technology Societies. The 16 survey items included two demographic items, six items on experience with preprints, five 5-point Likert-scale items on attitudes towards preprints, and three items on advantages and disadvantages. Results: Out of 365 respondents, 56 had deposited their manuscripts on preprint servers, while 49 stated that they allowed preprints in their journals. More than half of the respondents expressed favorable attitudes towards prioritizing preprint deposition, promotion of open access, rapid feedback on preprints, earlier citations, and evidence of research work. Responders in engineering had more experience with the concept of preprints, and were more likely to have heard about preprint servers and preprint deposition by other researchers, than those in medicine. Half of the editors disagreed with the need for preprints, for reasons including a lack of scientific integrity, stealing ideas/scooping data, priority issues regarding research ideas, and copyright problems. Conclusion: The above results showed that preprints are still not actively used in Korea. Although experiences with preprints were not widespread, more than half of the respondents showed favorable attitudes towards preprints. More of a consensus should emerge for preprint policies to be accepted by editors in Korea.","PeriodicalId":43802,"journal":{"name":"Science Editing","volume":"8 1","pages":"4-9"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Korean editors’ and researchers’ experiences with preprints and attitudes towards preprint policies\",\"authors\":\"H. Yi, Sun Huh\",\"doi\":\"10.6087/KCSE.223\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: This study investigated editors’ and researcher’s experiences with preprints and their attitudes towards preprint policies in Korea. Methods: From December 30, 2019 to January 10, 2020, a Google Forms survey was mailed to members of the Korean Council of Science Editors and the Korean Federation of Science and Technology Societies. The 16 survey items included two demographic items, six items on experience with preprints, five 5-point Likert-scale items on attitudes towards preprints, and three items on advantages and disadvantages. Results: Out of 365 respondents, 56 had deposited their manuscripts on preprint servers, while 49 stated that they allowed preprints in their journals. More than half of the respondents expressed favorable attitudes towards prioritizing preprint deposition, promotion of open access, rapid feedback on preprints, earlier citations, and evidence of research work. Responders in engineering had more experience with the concept of preprints, and were more likely to have heard about preprint servers and preprint deposition by other researchers, than those in medicine. Half of the editors disagreed with the need for preprints, for reasons including a lack of scientific integrity, stealing ideas/scooping data, priority issues regarding research ideas, and copyright problems. Conclusion: The above results showed that preprints are still not actively used in Korea. Although experiences with preprints were not widespread, more than half of the respondents showed favorable attitudes towards preprints. More of a consensus should emerge for preprint policies to be accepted by editors in Korea.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43802,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science Editing\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"4-9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-02-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science Editing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.6087/KCSE.223\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science Editing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6087/KCSE.223","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

目的:本研究调查韩国编辑与研究者的预印本经验,以及他们对预印本政策的态度。方法:于2019年12月30日至2020年1月10日,向韩国科学编辑委员会和韩国科学技术学会联合会成员邮寄谷歌Forms调查问卷。16个调查项目包括2个人口统计项目、6个预印本使用经验项目、5个李克特5分制预印本态度项目和3个利弊项目。结果:在365名受访者中,56人将他们的手稿存放在预印本服务器上,而49人表示他们允许在他们的期刊上预印本。超过一半的受访者对优先考虑预印本沉积、促进开放获取、对预印本的快速反馈、早期引用和研究工作证据表示赞成。工程领域的应答者对预印本的概念有更多的经验,并且比医学领域的应答者更有可能从其他研究人员那里听说预印本服务器和预印本沉积。一半的编辑不同意预印本的必要性,原因包括缺乏科学诚信、窃取思想/挖掘数据、有关研究思想的优先事项以及版权问题。结论:上述结果表明,预印本在国内的应用仍不活跃。虽然使用预印本的经验并不普遍,但一半以上的答复者对预印本表示好感。为了让韩国编辑们接受预印本政策,应该达成更多的共识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Korean editors’ and researchers’ experiences with preprints and attitudes towards preprint policies
Purpose: This study investigated editors’ and researcher’s experiences with preprints and their attitudes towards preprint policies in Korea. Methods: From December 30, 2019 to January 10, 2020, a Google Forms survey was mailed to members of the Korean Council of Science Editors and the Korean Federation of Science and Technology Societies. The 16 survey items included two demographic items, six items on experience with preprints, five 5-point Likert-scale items on attitudes towards preprints, and three items on advantages and disadvantages. Results: Out of 365 respondents, 56 had deposited their manuscripts on preprint servers, while 49 stated that they allowed preprints in their journals. More than half of the respondents expressed favorable attitudes towards prioritizing preprint deposition, promotion of open access, rapid feedback on preprints, earlier citations, and evidence of research work. Responders in engineering had more experience with the concept of preprints, and were more likely to have heard about preprint servers and preprint deposition by other researchers, than those in medicine. Half of the editors disagreed with the need for preprints, for reasons including a lack of scientific integrity, stealing ideas/scooping data, priority issues regarding research ideas, and copyright problems. Conclusion: The above results showed that preprints are still not actively used in Korea. Although experiences with preprints were not widespread, more than half of the respondents showed favorable attitudes towards preprints. More of a consensus should emerge for preprint policies to be accepted by editors in Korea.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Science Editing
Science Editing COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
20.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: Science Editing (Sci Ed) is the official journal of the Korean Council of Science Editors (https://kcse.org) and Council of Asian Science Editors (https://asianeditor.org). It aims to improve the culture and health of human being by promoting the quality of editing and publishing scientific, technical, and medical journals. Expected readers are editors, publishers, reviewers, and authors of the journals around the world; however, specially focused to those in Asia. Since scholarly journals in Asia are mostly published by the academic societies, universities, or non-profit organizations, Sci Ed is sought to play a role in journal development. The number of publications from Asia is increasing rapidly and overpass that of other continents; meanwhile, the number of international journals and highly appreciated journals is yet to be coming forward. It is task of Asian editors to pledge the journal quality and broaden the visibility and accessibility. Therefore, its scope includes the followings in the field of science, technology, and medicine.
期刊最新文献
Impact factor surge in Korean medical journals during the COVID-19 era: a bibliometric study Trends in research on ChatGPT and adoption-related issues discussed in articles: a narrative review Get Full Text Research (GetFTR): can it be a good tool for researchers? What is next for “transformation, trust, and transparency”? Korean scholarly journal editors’ and publishers’ attitudes towards journal data sharing policies and data papers (2023): a survey-based descriptive study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1