Errata Publishing in Library and Information Science Journals From 2001 to 2020 and Citation Patterns of Published Errata: Analysis and Insights 2001-2020年圖書資訊學期刊勘誤文章之出版及被引用原因之分析與見解

Please visit JoEMLS website via DOI (ttps://doi.org/10.6120/JoEMLS.202503_62(1).0046.RS.AM) to read the Peer Review Report (Open Point) and Article Summary (InSight Point) of the article. The present study examined the publication of errata notices in library and information science (LIS) journals, including the reasons for their publication and citation and whether they were cited accurately. The findings were compared with those of Yang et al. (2023) to assess the influence of journal selection on results. According to an analysis of 325 errata notices published in 80 LIS journals indexed in Scopus and Ulrichweb, errata notices were published as corrections regarding 1. author information, 2. data embedded in tables and figures, and 3. references, in alignment with Yang et al.’s findings. However, the proportion of notices addressing these errors was higher in the present study than in that of Yang et al. (65.2% vs. 44.7%). Among the limited number of errata notices cited by other authors, most were referenced to provide background information or contextualize related studies. Most of these authors cited the original article rather than corrections announced in the errata notice. The proportion of inaccurate citations to errata notices identified in Yang et al.’s study (90.3%) was considerably higher than that found in this study (58.8%). These findings highlight differences in results based on the selection of LIS journals from different databases, underscoring the necessity of careful journal selection. Furthermore, the study findings emphasize the need for authors and journal editors to thoroughly review manuscripts for minor errors before publication to enhance overall publication quality. 本研究著眼於圖書資訊學期刊選刊問題對研究結果之影響，審慎定義圖書資訊學期刊後，探討圖書資訊學期刊勘誤文章的出版情況、出版原因、被引用原因及引用之正確性情形。研究與Yang等（2023）研究結果比較，經分析Scopus資料庫中80種圖書資訊學期刊於2001 年至2020 年間的325 篇勘誤文章，顯示勘誤文章之主要出版原因同Yang等人研究結果，包括：更正作者資訊、圖表數據及參考文獻，但相關占比更（65.2% vs. 44.7%）。少數被引用的勘誤文章主要用於解釋研究背景與文獻回顧，以及大多數引用勘誤文章的文獻實際引用的是原出版文章，未正確引用勘誤文章的比例為58.8%，低於Yang等人研究之90.3%。本研究佐證及建議注意學科期刊選擇及資料庫特性差異，並提醒作者及期刊出版社在文章正式出版前應注意之各種輕微錯誤，以提高出版品質。