• Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice
• /
• 제7권4호
• /
• pp.20-32
• /
• 2019

Due to the competitive nature of journal publishing, editorial leadership has become an increasingly important issue on many editorial teams. This study aimed to compare the major and non-Western international journals in library and information science and reveal the differences between them. To conduct this study, journals indexed by Scopus and Web of Science were analyzed in terms of gender, professional position and rank, institutions, and the iSchool status of the editorial leaders' institutions. The most notable results were the following: a) As a whole, both types of journals lacked true internationalization. Editorial leaders of major journals tended to be from Western countries, whereas editorial leaders of non-Western journals tended to be from non-Western countries; b) Most non-Western journals tended to appoint editorial leaders from the same country as the publisher's country; and c) Almost all editorial leaders of non-Western journals were from various non-Western countries and tended to have lower h-index scores, and their institutions were not part of the iSchool. Future research should assess editorial leadership, compare the results of this study to other disciplines, and find effective ways to collect data on editorial leaders while minimizing ethical concerns in order to meet future research needs.

• Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice
• /
• 제11권2호
• /
• pp.22-36
• /
• 2023

This study assesses the growth and distribution of research journals indexed in Scopus from 2000 through 2019, using SCImago data for journal and country ranking. A total of 15,484 journals were indexed in Scopus up till 1999, and from 2000 to 2019, 11,037 journals were indexed in Scopus at an average of 581.85 journals per year at an average annual corresponding growth of 2.74%. Of the total journals indexed in Scopus, 41.61% were indexed during the last two decades. Europe is the leading continent publishing nearly 60% of the total world journals, while Africa publishes around 1% of journals, the lowest among all the continents. The United Kingdom, United States (US), China, Brazil, Australia, and Egypt are the leading countries publishing the maximum number of journals from their respective continents. Of the total journals indexed across the world, nearly one-fourth (6,425, 24.23%) are published in the US. Still more, of the 109 journal publishing countries across the world, nearly 90% of journals are published in twenty leading journal publishing countries. Among the 27 major Scopus recognized subject disciplines, the majority (1,606, 6.06%) of journals are published in the field of medicine. The growth of research journals and the growth of research results has moved at a uniform pace, and any asymmetry between the two is bound to result either in the introduction of predatory and dubious journals or in the production of sub-standard research results.

• 한국환경교육학회지:환경교육
• /
• 제22권4호
• /
• pp.111-133
• /
• 2009

To understand the research trend of environmental education(EE) during last two decades, we analyzed a total of 801 research papers published from 1990 to 2008, 418 research papers from "Hwankyungkyouk" and 393 research papers from "The Journal of Environmental Education(JEE)", respectively. The majority of the authors in both journals majored in EE, followed by authors of science education major in "Hwankyungkyouk" and authors of social science major in JEE. In both journals, more researches were data-collected by quantitative method rather than qualitative method. In particular, the ratio of researches by qualitative method have been dramatically increased since the mid 1990s. The significance test was less used in Korean EE researches than those in JEE. In both journals, more EE researches for elementary and secondary school students were accomplished, which tended to be more salient in Korea. The result of the analysis of 119 EE programs in both journals proposed that EE program needs to be developed more diversely in content as well as in educational method.

• 정보관리학회지
• /
• 제18권1호
• /
• pp.85-104
• /
• 2001

A Scientometric Study SCI Impact Factors of Major Korean Medical Jernals: 1991-1999 본 연구에서는 SCI학술지가 아니라서 Journal Citation Reports(JCR)를 통하여 영향력지표 값을 쉽기 알 수 없는 학술지들의 영향력지표값을 JCR 방식으로 산출함으로서, 한국 의학 학술지들의 구체적인 학술지 평가지표를 제시하고 국제적인 위상을 객관적으로 파악하였다. 1969년부터 1998년까지 10년간 의학분야의 국내학술지 8종에 발표된 7,779편의 논문을 대상 으로 SCI검색을 하여 연도별로 인용빈도를 측정하고 1991년부터 1999년까지의 학술지 영향 력지표를 JCR과 동일한 방식으로 계량하여 분서하였다. 한글학술지 4종의 경우에는 국내학 자들이 SCI논문을 많이 발표하는 분야의 대표적인 학술지임에도 불구하고, SCI 인용을 거 의 찾아볼 수 없었다. 영문학술지 4종에 대한 SCI 인용빈도는 1994년경부터 계속 늘어나고 있으며, 특히 1997,8년경부터는 인용주기가 짧아져서 최근 2,3년간 발표된 논문에 대한 인용 이 급증하고 있고, 따라서 영향력지표값이 높아지고 있는 것은 매우 고무적이다. 한국 의학 학술지들의 10년치 영향력지표값 평균은 0.002에서 0.126까지 분포하였으며, YMJ의 1999년 도 영항력 지표값이 0.331로 가장 높았다. 한글학술지들의 영향력지표값을 같은 분야의 SCI 학술지들과 비교하여 보면, 모두 SCI 등재학술지의 최하위 영향력지표겂보다 낮았고, 영문 학술지는 대개 최하위권이어서 한국학술지의 국제적 위상은 매우 낮은 것으로 나타났다. 한 국 의학학술지 3종은 1990년대 후반 영향력지표값이 0.2 정도가 되었을 때 SCI에 등재되기 시작하였는데, 이들은 모두 영문학술지들이다. 영문으로 발행되는 현재 MEDLINE 학술지인 KJP는 1999년의 영향력지표값이 0.198로서 SCI등재 가능성이 있는 학술지로 판단된다.

• 유통과학연구
• /
• 제14권4호
• /
• pp.5-11
• /
• 2016

Purpose - The Education Ministry has plans to select top 10 percent academic journals among the domestic registration journals in NRF(National Research Foundation of Korea), and designate them as outstanding academic journals. To reflect this trend, KODISA has set its sights on paper publication rate and citation index with pushing forward globalism. First, this study will arrange the process of globalism and the current state of paper submission, and propose the direction of improvement in academic journals through understanding the characteristics of each major field. Research design, data, and methodology - KODISA has preceeded in examining and publishing research papers related to distribution field through indirectly or stimulating academic advancement. KODISA covers the whole fields in social science as well as in business administration and economics that associated with distribution field not limiting only within the range of distribution field. That is, the new subject that contributes to the progress in distribution field with original research can be a priority criteria in KODISA journal publication. Results - The major fields in papers published in KODISA can be categorized broadly as distribution field with economic and business administration point of view. Therefore, the distribution field with economic point of view includes the issues such as regulations, system, industry, market environment, distribution system, trade, and macroeconomics, etc. The business administration point of view in distribution includes distribution strategy, distribution organization, and distribution channel from the perspectives of the firm, etc. Conclusions - The aim of KODISA in 2020 is to be a global academic journal as SCI level of each journal in KODISA, JDS(Registration journal), IJIDB(Registration candidate), EAJBM(Registration candidate), JAFEB(Cabell's Registration journal). The KODISA journals have already settled as the largest academic society and journals of Korea in 2016 currently from humanities and social sciences area by the most gross in publication circulation, volumes, and types. Hereafter, KODISA will focus on the improvement for the objective indicators such as Impact Factor and Centrality index as qualitative growth as well as quantitative expansion. By doing so, KODISA will be a forum for developmental academic debate with attracting the world's greatest scholars' papers. Furthermore, they will be recognized journals and grow as the first-rate academic journals inside and outside of Korea.

• 연구윤리
• /
• 제2권2호
• /
• pp.21-24
• /
• 2021

Purpose: This paper aims to evaluate and reinstate preventative guidelines necessary for a sound academic journal (or academic conference) for the articles published by KODISA and its branch journals. As questionable or predatory academic journals and academic conferences are rapidly increasing, preemptively establishing preventative standards have become essential to obviate questionable academic activities. Research design, data and methodology: This is an analytical study that explores and examines research, publication ethics, and misconducts. For this purpose, research ethics related data in overseas and domestic academic journals have been examined and analyzed. Results: The issues identified from this research are as follows: enhancing the expertise of editor-inchief (no concurrent jobs for major and non-major area); clarifying the index; complying with the review policy (The review policy should be publicly announced); complying with anonymous review process; complying with 3 peer-review policy, complying with the publication policy as per field of study; avoiding conference hosting at holiday resorts unless unavoidable; complying with the planned programs and cancelling events if not feasible; following proper review standards and management for all journals, including the journals publishing large number of articles (all materials should be prepared in case explanatory data is required); complying with the marketing policy standards; complying with the impact factor; excluding personal solicitation; and complying with the general policy. Conclusions: Questionable and predatory academic activities by academic organizations and journals will continue, and it is the responsibility of the individual scholars to identify and reject these types of dubious academic activities. This study provides standards to prevent the possibility of questionable academic activities that have been conducted in the past. The analysis and findings will strengthen the continued efforts of KODISA as it strives to be a transparent, ethical, and professional academic association, and the association will continue to foster an academic environment that is well-respected by scholars and practitioners throughout the world.

• 유통과학연구
• /
• 제13권3호
• /
• pp.5-9
• /
• 2015

Purpose -The purpose of this study was to review and analyze the four major journals of KODISA and all of their published articles of 2014 and to revise and update the existing publication standards and practices in order to improve the overall quality and reputation of these journals. Research design, data, and methodology - This study applied an analytical approach, a case study method, to analyze and examine the published articles and the publication standards and practices of four KODISA journals, JDS (1999), IJIDB (2010), EAJBM (2011), and JAFEB (2014), from their first publication. Results - In 2014, KODISA journals published a total of 171 papers - JDS (122), IJIDB and EAJBM (16 each), and JAFEB (17): 94 articles in general business and 77 articles in economics. Conclusions - KODISA journals continuously revised and updated their publication standards and practices and adopted technological support systems to enable its journals to remain independent and open access in order to ultimately become one of the world's reputable journals.

• 연구윤리
• /
• 제1권2호
• /
• pp.1-5
• /
• 2020

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to identify the most common misconducts in publication ethics, to demonstrate KODISA journals' management of the misconducts, and to share the findings with future and potential authors of Journal of Research and Publication Ethics (JRPE). Research design, data and methodology: This is an analytical study that explores and examines research and publication ethics and misconducts. Results: Based on literature review, major publication misconducts that many academic journals had to contend with over the years encompass unethical authorship, including ghost, guest, and gift authorships, data falsification and fabrication, plagiarism, including self-plagiarism, submission and publication fraud (multiple submission and publication), and potential conflicts of interest. Conclusions: KODISA and its journals have strived and done great work in making the journals transparent and in combatting the issues associated with plagiarism, including self-plagiarism. However, it seems there is no mechanism to detect or deter unethical authorship, conflicts of interest, and fabrication and falsification misconducts. The inception of JRPE signifies how KODISA and its journals continuously view research and publication ethics as their foremost important factor in maintaining and improving the academic journals. The future research and scholastic manuscripts of JRPE could provide necessary and updated information about research and publication ethics, practices, and misconducts.

• Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice
• /
• 제1권3호
• /
• pp.47-59
• /
• 2013

The present study aims to assess the growth of open access journals at a global level. The concept of Open Access (OA) publishing is being well received among academic circles and as a result we can see more and more scholarly content is being made these days available in open access format. The present study is simply an attempt to assess the trend and growth of open access journals during the last decade, viz. for the period 2003-2012, for which data has been retrieved from the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), which as of date hosts more than 9700 journals from 120 countries across the world covering major languages of the world. But keeping in view the period of our study the data has been retrieved as per our applicability, which as a result confines our study to 8453 journals only. The directory covers 18 main subject areas having 76 sub-disciplines, each having on average 118.53 journals. During the entire decade the number of countries which entered into OA publishing rose from 49 to 120 with a growth of 144%, and if this growth rate continues to be the same for the next five years, viz. by 2018, the world will turn into 100% open access. At the continental level Europe leads the tally by publishing a maximum of 3140 OA journals contributed by 43 countries across Europe, which again is the highest number from any continent.

• 정보관리학회지
• /
• 제15권2호
• /
• pp.29-46
• /
• 1998

국내에서는 연구업적을 평가할 때에, 주요국제색인 초록에 수록되는 외국 학술지에 게재된 한국의학노문에 가중치를 부여하고 잇다. 본 논문에서는 이러한 연구업적평가에 이용되는 의학분야의 주요 색인 및 초록 데이터베이스인 EMBASE, MEDLINE, SCISEARCH에 수록된 논문중 1990년에서 1995년 사이에 외국학술지에 발표된 한국의학논문의 중복정도를 측정하고, 그 특성을 분석하여 연구업적 평가의 효율성과 타당성을 제고하기 위한 데이터베이스 선정방법을 제시하고자 하였다. 한국의학논문이 게재되는 학술지의 주제분야, 발행국, 언어 등은 데이터베이스간에 서로 큰 차이를 보이지 않았다. 따라서 각 데이터베이스에서 검색된 논문의 수량만으로 데이터베이스 선정방법을 제시하는 기준으로 하여야 할 것이다. 의학연구업적을 평가할때에, 한개의 데이터베이스를 사용한다면 MEDLINE보다는 한국의학논문이 가장 많이 검색된 SCISEARCH를, 두 개의 데이터베이스를 활용한다면 EMBASE를 추가하는 것이 효율적인 데이터베이스 선정방법이라고 할 수 있다.