共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
Most analyses of plagiarism focus on published content and do not report on the prevalence of plagiarism in submitted articles. Fears over large‐scale plagiarism, particularly in articles submitted by authors for whom English is a second language, have only been investigated in small publishing communities or using duplication‐checking analysis, which does not separate legitimate from unacceptable duplication. This research surveyed journal editors from around the world to ascertain recent (past year) experiences of plagiarized and/or duplicated submissions. We then compared their experiences to their assumptions about global levels of plagiarism. The survey received 372 responses, including 119 from Asian editors, 112 from European editors, and 57 from editors in North America. The respondents estimated that c.15% of all submissions contained plagiarized or duplicated content, although their own experiences were in the range of 2–5% of submissions. Of the respondents, 42% reported no incidence of plagiarized or duplicated submissions in the past year. Asian editors experienced the highest levels of plagiarized/duplicated content, although most of the problem articles were resolved, indicating that most of the identified duplication constituted relatively minor problems, rather than fraudulent plagiarism. 相似文献
2.
3.
4.
The purpose of this survey was to investigate journal editors' use of CrossCheck, powered by iThenticate, to detect plagiarism, and their attitude to potential plagiarism once discovered. A 22‐question survey was sent to 3,305 recipients, primarily scholarly journal editors from Anglophone countries, and a reduced 10‐question version to 607 editors from non‐Anglophone countries. The response rate was 5.6%. 42% of all respondents had used CrossCheck in their work. The main findings are as follows: (1) the plagiarism detection tool and its similarity report are extremely useful and effective and can assist editors in screening documents suspected of plagiarism; (2) responses show the journal editors' attitude and level of tolerance towards different kinds of plagiarism in different disciplines; (3) the survey results underscore a clear consensus on editorial standards on plagiarism, but there were small variations between different disciplines and countries, as well as between Anglophone and non‐Anglophone. The study also suggests that further work is needed to establish a universal principle and practical approaches to prevent plagiarism and duplicate publication. 相似文献
5.
根据近些年来硕士研究生论文投稿与刊发比例不断增多这一事实,以《苏州科技大学学报(工程技术版)》等为例,归纳近几年来刊发硕士研究生论文的情况,分析研究生作者的特点,从编辑的视角编辑论文、规范格式、指正不足之处,同时从师者的责任心去帮助他们了解学术规范,扮演着编者、师者、友者的多重角色,形成一种高校学报所特有的研究生作者与学报编辑良好的关系. 相似文献
6.
Over the past decade, text recycling (TR; AKA ‘self‐plagiarism’) has become a visible and somewhat contentious practice, particularly in the realm of journal articles. While growing numbers of publishers are writing editorials and formulating guidelines on TR, little is known about how editors view the practice or how they respond to it. We present results from an interview‐based study of 21 North American journal editors from a broad range of academic disciplines. Our findings show that editors' beliefs and practices are quite individualized rather than being tied to disciplinary or other structural parameters. While none of our participants supported the use of large amounts of recycled material from one journal article to another, some editors were staunchly against any use of recycled material, while others were accepting of the practice in certain circumstances. Issues of originality, the challenges of rewriting text, the varied circulation of texts, and abiding by copyright law were prominent themes as editors discussed their approaches to TR. Overall, the interviews showed that many editors have not thought systematically about the practice of TR, and they sometimes have trouble aligning their beliefs and practices. 相似文献
7.
8.
从编辑实践角度出发,探讨人工智能应用对学术期刊编辑工作的影响并分析了学术期刊编辑的转型路径。人工智能带来的机遇有：优化学术出版工作流程并提高加工质量、强化编辑把关能力和效果、AI生成内容给编辑从事全媒体传播活动提供了机遇、提升学术出版资源配置和编辑价值创造力。但人工智能也带来如何与人工智能技术协调、面对人工智能生产内容、人工智能生成的新媒体形态等挑战。期刊编辑需要锻造数据分析和价值发现能力、提高智能环境下的把关能力、形成与技术协同的全媒体编辑能力和以人文价值驾驭新技术的新能力应对上述挑战。 相似文献
9.
以退稿为例谈编辑如何更好地服务作者 总被引：2，自引：0，他引：2
退稿涉及到大部分作者,如果处理不好,就会影响很大一部分作者的积极性。本文阐明退稿工作中编辑与作者的分歧所在,指出超过规定期限不给作者回信、退稿意见不详细是作者不满意的主要原因。论述编辑如何更好地服务作者,认为加大约稿力度、增加青年编委审稿以及在退稿函中增加信息含量,是更好地服务于作者的有力举措。 相似文献
10.
Giangiacomo Bravo Mike Farjam Francisco Grimaldo Moreno Aliaksandr Birukou Flaminio Squazzoni 《Journal of Informetrics》2018,12(1):101-112
This paper aims to examine the influence of authors’ reputation on editorial bias in scholarly journals. By looking at eight years of editorial decisions in four computer science journals, including 7179 observations on 2913 submissions, we reconstructed author/referee-submission networks. For each submission, we looked at reviewer scores and estimated the reputation of submission authors by means of their network degree. By training a Bayesian network, we estimated the potential effect of scientist reputation on editorial decisions. Results showed that more reputed authors were less likely to be rejected by editors when they submitted papers receiving negative reviews. Although these four journals were comparable for scope and areas, we found certain journal specificities in their editorial process. Our findings suggest ways to examine the editorial process in relatively similar journals without recurring to in-depth individual data, which are rarely available from scholarly journals. 相似文献
11.
12.
优秀作者群是提升科技期刊质量的重要保障。数字出版时代下,英文版科技期刊编辑应善于发现和培养优秀作者群。针对国内外不同的作者群,本文采用了不同的培养策略:举办英文科技论文写作培训班、稿件处理过程中与作者互动、移动平台等方式培养国内优秀作者群;发挥国际编委主动性、期刊带头举办国际学术会议、选取重要国外作者为审稿人以及科技期刊编辑参加国际学术会议等方式培养国外优秀作者群。 相似文献
13.
Noel McGlinchey Tom Hunter Jack Bromley Ruth Fisher Anna Debiec‐Waszak Thomas Gaston 《Learned Publishing》2019,32(1):37-46
The study aimed to find whether journal editorial office administrators were as effective as editors at assigning rigorous reviewers. We analysed four journals using blended systems of editor‐selected reviewers (ESR) and Journal Administrator‐selected reviewers (JASR) from four disciplines: medicine, sociology, education, and business/applied psychology. In blended journals, both editors and Journal Administrators select authors to review using web‐based expert‐finding tools. All reviewers selected were both authors and reviewers. We primarily wanted to assess the quality of reviews from both ESR and JASR reviewer selection methodologies. Reviewer rigour was defined as differences between editor decisions and reviewer recommendations. Timeliness data were also recorded and analysed separately as an indicator of efficiency. Reviewer rigour, the quality of reviewers’ evaluations, was estimated from the level of agreement between editors and reviewers. Timeliness was not considered a direct measure of rigour. For two journals, no statistically significant differences were observed; for two, in a small proportion of cases, ESR reviews were more negative. One journal showed some statistically significant major differences but only in 2% of reviews. Timeliness data indicated some statistically significant trends that JASR return reviews more promptly. Therefore, where editors rely on at least two reviewers’ recommendations, JASR is equally rigorous as ESR. 相似文献
14.
专家办刊结合专业办刊双管模式的实践和成果 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
以《中国科学:物理学力学天文学》(英文版)[Science China:Physics Mechanics&Astronomy》(SCPMA)]期刊为例,结合办刊模式的转变,介绍编委会工作重心的调整,以及编辑在稿件审理中的作用.通过将专家办刊调整为专家办刊结合专业办刊的双管模式后,编委的更多工作侧重于约稿和宣传,而编辑部在稿件的评审过程中,尤其是初筛过程中的作用更为明显.模式转变后,期刊的约稿比例明显上升,约稿质量带动期刊的影响力提升,影响因子由2013年的0.864提升至2015年的1.575.同时,编委的宣传带动期刊的品牌效应,使期刊越来越多地展示于各大学术会议,为期刊带来更多关注和高水平投稿.由此可以看出,新形势下模式的转变可促进期刊的更快发展,提升期刊的稿源质量. 相似文献
15.
New evidence from the largest democracy in the world, India,and her four neighboring countries in South Asia has come tocomplete a picture that is difficult to ignore. Today we gather,in the Globalbarometer, public opinion data from 46 emergentdemocracies. The query posed by the new South Asian Barometeris not what democracy is doing to these societies, but whatthese societies are doing to democracy. Comparing results for Africa, Latin America, East Asia, andSouth Asia renders a map of a reduced understanding of democracy.It appears that the more democracy spreads, the more simplethe conception of democracy in people's minds gets. It seemswith few exceptions in the countries surveyed that democracyto the people means above all freedom, whereas the institutionaland procedural dimension of the concept is not so salient 相似文献
16.
Penetration of Nigerian predatory biomedical open access journals 2007–2012: a bibliometric study 
下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 This paper presents the bibliometric characteristics of 32 biomedical open access journals published by Academic Journals and International Research Journals – the two Nigerian publishers in Jeffery Beall's list of 23 predatory open access publishers in 2012. Data about the journals and the authors of their articles were collected from the websites of the publishers, Google Scholar and Web of Science. As at December 2012, the journals had together produced a total of 5,601 papers written by 5,599 authors, and received 12,596 citations. Authors from Asia accounted for 56.79% of the publications; those from Africa wrote 28.35% while Europe contributed 7.78%. Authors from Africa accounted for 18.25% of the citations these journals received, and this is about one‐third the number of citations by authors in Asia (54.62%). At country level, India ranks first in the top 10 citer countries, while Nigeria, the host country of the journals, ranked eighth. More in‐depth studies are required to develop further information about the journals such as how much scientific information the journals contain, as well as the science literacy of the authors and the editorial. 相似文献
17.
18.
Mehdi Dadkhah Glenn Borchardt Mohammad Lagzian Giorgio Bianciardi 《Publishing Research Quarterly》2017,33(2):183-187
The current status of academic publishing is worrying. Cybercriminals are now targeting academic audiences, making it necessary to inform both editors and authors about such issues. The latest involves bogus impact factors, which are challenging scholarly publishing. Legitimate impact factors are used by authors and editors to get a general idea of the audience, if any, for a particular piece or journal. The bogus metrics only add confusion in support of the cybercrimes of their initiators. In this paper, we discuss bogus impact factors, victim countries, and try to clarify the phenomena for both authors and editors. 相似文献
19.
Benjamin MUDRAK 《Learned Publishing》2015,28(2):147-149
- As a result of the considerable (and growing) number of scholarly journals, it is difficult for authors to find the best place for their research, even as many journals face challenges in finding new submissions.
- JournalGuide ( www.journalguide.com ) is a free tool that matches user‐inputted keywords or text to article metadata and returns journals that have recently published similar work.
- Users can then compare information about these journals and make an informed decision about where to submit.