IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jamist/v54y2003i12p1153-1159.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Linking of errata: Current practices in online physical sciences journals

Author

Listed:
  • Emily L. Poworoznek

Abstract

Reader awareness of article corrections can be of critical importance in the physical and biomedical sciences. Comparison of errata and corrigenda in online versions of high‐impact physical sciences journals across titles and publishers yielded surprising variability. Of 43 online journals surveyed, 17 had no links between original articles and later corrections. When present, hyperlinks between articles and errata showed patterns in presentation style, but lacked consistency. Variability in the presentation, linking, and availability of online errata indicates that practices are not evenly developed across the field. Comparison of finding tools showed excellent coverage of errata by Science Citation Index, lack of indexing in INSPEC, and lack of retrieval with SciFinder Scholar. The development of standards for the linking of original articles to errata is recommended.

Suggested Citation

  • Emily L. Poworoznek, 2003. "Linking of errata: Current practices in online physical sciences journals," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 54(12), pages 1153-1159, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jamist:v:54:y:2003:i:12:p:1153-1159
    DOI: 10.1002/asi.10320
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.10320
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/asi.10320?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Frederique Bordignon, 2020. "Self-correction of science: a comparative study of negative citations and post-publication peer review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1225-1239, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jamist:v:54:y:2003:i:12:p:1153-1159. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.asis.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.