中国科技期刊研究 ›› 2019, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (2): 149-155.doi: 10.11946/cjstp.201811120995

• 数字出版 • 上一篇    下一篇

中国科技期刊引入开放同行评议机制的思考与建议

孟美任1,2),张晓林1)   

  1. 1) 中国科学院文献情报中心,北京市海淀区中关村北四环西路33号 100190
    2) 中国科学院大学经济与管理学院图书情报与档案管理系,北京市海淀区中关村北四环西路33号 100190
  • 收稿日期:2018-11-12 修回日期:2018-12-04 出版日期:2019-02-15 发布日期:2019-02-15
  • 作者简介:孟美任(ORCID:0000-0002-0434-9504),硕士,馆员,E-mail: mengmr@mail.las.ac.cn|张晓林,博士,研究员。
  • 基金资助:
    中国科学院文献情报中心青年人才领域前沿项目“嵌入式科研工作流的新型出版模式研究”(馆1725)

Practice guidelines for open peer review in Chinese scientific journals

MENG Meiren1,2),ZHANG Xiaolin1)   

  1. 1) National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 33 Beisihuan Xilu, Zhongguancun, Haidian District, Beijing 100190, China
    2) Department of Library, Information and Archives Management, School of Economics and Management,University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 33 Beisihuan Xilu, Zhongguancun, Haidian District, Beijing 100190, China
  • Received:2018-11-12 Revised:2018-12-04 Online:2019-02-15 Published:2019-02-15

摘要:

目的】 为促进科学传播、提升期刊影响力,探讨中国科技期刊试验开放同行评议的可能方式。【方法】 首先,从公开内容、参与范围、公开时间3个维度对同行评议机制的开放程度进行界定;然后,从同行评议本身的目标和需求出发,利用象限分析法对传统同行评议和开放同行评议进行分析;最后,提出支持措施以增强开放同行评议的积极作用,提出规避措施以消减其消极作用。【结果】 提出中国科技期刊试验开放同行评议的实践建议:在继续优化传统同行评议机制的同时,引入某些开放同行评议的做法,从而提高同行评议的综合质量和影响。【结论】 研究成果能够为开放同行评议制度的制定以及实践提供借鉴。

关键词: 开放同行评议, 公开评审, 同行评议, 科技期刊, 质量控制

Abstract:

[Purposes] This paper proposes practice guidelines of open peer review for Chinese scientific journals, aiming to promote the dissemination of science and enhance the influence of journal. [Methods] First, we defined the openness degree of open peer review from the three aspects of content, participation scope, and timing. Then, based on the goals and needs of the peer review, we did a contrastive analysis to compare the traditional review mechanism and open peer review by dimensional quadrant method. Finally, some suggestions were proposed to intensify positive effect and counteract negative effect of open peer review in China. [Findings] We propose some practical guidelines of the open peer review for Chinese scientific journals, such as optimizing the traditional review mechanism, introducing some open peer review practices to improve the overall quality and impact of peer review. [Conclusions] The proposed suggestions could provide an effective way to practice open peer review.

Key words: Open peer review, Open review, Peer review, Scientific journal, Quality control