Compliance of “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing” in academic society published journals

Abstract

Four international associations, including the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association, the Directory of Open Access Journals, the Committee on Publication Ethics, and the World Association of Medical Editors declared the third version of "Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing" to ensure transparency and quality in journal publications. This study is aimed at assessing the guidelines from the journals' websites manually. Methods: In this study, three researchers investigate the homepages of 781 academic society-published journals that are registered in the Science Citation Index Expanded and whether these journals are effectively adopting these new guidelines. In this paper, 33 items from the guidelines are examined. The 33 items are rearranged into four different categories: basic journal information; publication ethics; copyright and archiving information; and profit model. The researchers count yes or no after checking the adopting status on the journal homepage and dividing into four scales: 0% to 25% for is rarely practiced, 26% to 50% for is poorly practiced, 51% to 75% for is adequately practiced, and 76% to 100% for is well practiced. Results: Of the 33 items, 10 are found to be poorly or rarely practiced, including readership, data sharing, archiving policies, and profit model information. Conclusion:It could be the most up-to-date indicator of the current status of applying best practice guidelines. Society journal editors especially from Asia should evaluate their journals regarding "Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing".

Compliance of “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing” in Korean academic society-published journals listed in Journal Citation Reports

“…We found that the 59 Korean academic journals analyzed in this study showed poor compliance with similar aspects of the "Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly pub-lishing" as we identified in 781 journals worldwide in our study in 2019 [8]. Korean journals showed relatively good compliance in the areas of readership, author fees, Committee on Publication Ethics' guideline, and archiving.…”

“…Similarly to a previous article published by the same researchers [8], we classified the 16 principles into four subgroups: basic journal information, publication ethics information, copyright and archiving information, and profit model information. If compliance with a criterion was satisfactory, the item was marked as "yes"; otherwise, it was marked as "no.…”

“…Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate Korean scholarly journals with respect to these principles and to identify directions for improvement [6]. No previous related research has been conducted on compliance with these principles, besides article on the ethics policy of Annals of Pediatric Endocrinology & Metabolism [7] and a study on 781 scholarly journals around the world [8], which were conducted by the authors of this article.…”

Position of Ultrasonography in the scholarly journal network based on bibliometrics and developmental strategies for it to become a top-tier journal

“…Fourth, the editors and editorial board members have played a superb role in these developments. They introduced an internationallevel editorial policy, including careful review, and firmly adhere to international ethical guidelines, including the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, 3rd version [13,14].…”

Changes in bibliographic information associated with Korean scientific journals from 2011 to 2019

“…should be clearly marked on the website as necessary bibliographic information associated with the journal. The quickest way to clarify the essential bibliographic information was to evaluate a journal's compliance with the "Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing, 3rd version" [3]. All journals that apply for KOFST funding can attempt to follow these standards.…”