• Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science
• /
• v.55 no.4
• /
• pp.45-65
• /
• 2021

This study was conducted to obtain a better understanding of Korean researchers' motivations and experience regarding open access publishing. An online survey was conducted with the Korean authors of PLOS ONE, a major open access mega journal (OAMJ). A total of 238 responses were collected; the analysis was based on 202 valid responses. The results of the survey were compared and constrated with the results of a major international study that investigated similar issues. For Korean authors with open access publishing experience, journal impact factor (JIF) is still the most important factor in making publishing decisions. There was a significant difference between general publishing venue decision making versus open access publishing venue decision. Overall, Korean authors are far less satisfied with open access publishing than the authors in the international study. The results suggest comparatively low level of expectation among Korean researchers toward open access publishing. Open access policy and training initiatives are needed to promote open access.

• Journal of the Korean Society for information Management
• /
• v.37 no.2
• /
• pp.47-69
• /
• 2020

This research provides a quantitative analysis on research articles published in PLoS ONE, a multidisciplinary open access journal, by authors affiliated with Korean institutions. Korean authors published more than 6,500 research ariticles in the mega journal between 2006 and 2019. Korea is ranked the top 11th place in terms of article publishing in the journal. Most articles by Korean authors are concentrated in the biomedical fields. In recent years, the overall production of PLoS ONE has decreased as authors migrated to competing mega journals such as Scientific Reports and BMJ Open. The change might have been affected in part by the delay in the review period and the dropping impact factor score. The open access share of the Korean PLoS ONE authors of more than 10 articles hovers around 30%. However, there is a significant variation among researchers reaching up to 50% discrepancies. Among altmetrics provided by PLoS ONE, the saves are highly correlated with the views and the citations. On the contrary, the shares show low correlation with other use metrics. A follow up, survey questionnarie based research involving researchers who have published in PLoS ONE is planned in order to investigate author motivation and experience in the review process.

• Journal of the Korean Society for information Management
• /
• v.37 no.4
• /
• pp.131-150
• /
• 2020

This study was conducted to ascertain a better understanding of researchers' perception of open peer review (OPR), which is being attempted to improve the problems of traditional peer review methods in recent journal publications. A survey was conducted on the Korean authors of a mega open access (OA) journals and the results were analyzed. The subjects of the survey were selected as Korean corresponding authors published on PLOS, an international OA journal and mega journal. The survey was conducted as an online questionnaire and a total of 238 responses were collected; the analysis was based on 202 valid responses. Data were analyzed by performing frequency analysis and average comparison between groups for the collected questionnaire results. As a result of analyzing whether there is a difference in perception of OPR depending on the age, research experience, and OPR experience of the researcher, researchers under the age of 44, researchers with research experience of 9 years or less, and researchers with OPR participation experience had differences in some OPR perceptions. Results show that researchers under the age of 44 want to change the current peer review approach, but they are not yet actively accepting OPR. As a result of analyzing the reasons why the researcher disagrees with OPR, they raised questions about lack of objectivity, increased burden of reviewers, emotions and relationships, and responded that the right to be forgotten was also necessary.