中国科技期刊研究 ›› 2019, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (8): 806-811.doi: 10.11946/cjstp.201903030136

• 论坛 • 上一篇    下一篇

商业数据库与学术期刊评价的问题与对策

杨海挺1),石敏2),张良3)(),曹洪刚4)   

  1. 1) 长安大学杂志社《长安大学学报(社会科学版)》编辑部,陕西省西安市南二环路中段 710064
    2) 云南大学历史与档案学院档案与信息管理系,云南省昆明市翠湖北路52号 650091
    3) 西安市文物保护考古研究院,陕西省西安市碑林区友谊西路68号 710068
    4) 《电影评介》编辑部,贵州省贵阳市宝山北路372号 550001
  • 收稿日期:2019-03-03 修回日期:2019-05-11 出版日期:2019-08-15 发布日期:2019-08-30
  • 通讯作者: 张良 E-mail:zhangliang@iicc.org.cn
  • 作者简介:杨海挺(ORCID:0000-0001-9244-7907),博士,编辑,E-mail: yanght@chd.edu.cn|石 敏,博士研究生|曹洪刚,硕士,主任编辑
  • 基金资助:
    中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金(310850160316);云南省博士研究生学术新人奖

Problems and countermeasures of commercial database and academic journal evaluation

YANG Haiting1),SHI Min2),ZHANG Liang3)(),CAO Honggang4)   

  1. 1) Editorial Office of Journal of Chang'an University (Social Science Edition), Chang'an University, Middle Section of South Second Ring Road, Xi'an 710064, China
    2) Department of Archives and Information Management, School of History and Archives, Yunnan University, 52 North Cuihu Road, Kunming 650091, China
    3) Xi'an Municipal Cultural Relics Conservation and Archaeology Institute, 68 West Youyi Road, Beilin District, Xi'an 710068, China
    4) Editorial Office of Moive Review, 372 North Baoshan Road, Guiyang 550001, China
  • Received:2019-03-03 Revised:2019-05-11 Online:2019-08-15 Published:2019-08-30
  • Contact: ZHANG Liang E-mail:zhangliang@iicc.org.cn

摘要:

【目的】分析商业数据库给学术期刊评价带来的问题,提出科学合理的改进对策。【方法】采用比较研究法、个案分析法,对中国知网、万方、维普等商业数据库的各项指标与学术期刊评价的各项指标进行比较论证。【结果】学术期刊评价中存在被引数据受到了网络首发的影响、web下载量缺少开放获取的数据、学术不端检测系统未对作者起到规范作用、审稿专家库建设不足等问题。【结论】商业数据库需要完善自身的业务与数据体系,为学术期刊评价提供更加全面科学的计量数据;利用开放的学术不端检测系统和审稿人专家库来对学术期刊发表的论文质量进行把关,提升基于商业数据库形成的学术期刊评价体系的科学性、公正性与全面性。

关键词: 商业数据库, 学术期刊评价, 核心期刊, 开放获取, 审稿人专家库

Abstract:

[Purposes] This paper aims to analyze the problems existing in the evaluation of academic journals by commercial databases, and put forward scientific and reasonable improvement countermeasures. [Methods] Through comparative research and case analysis, the indicators of commercial databases such as CNKI, Wanfang, and Chongqing VIP were compared with the indicators of academic journal evaluation. [Findings] There exist the following problems in the evaluation of academic journals: the cited data is affected by the network first publishing, the web downloads lack the open access data, the academic misconduct detection system does not play a role in regulating the authors, and the reviewer database is insufficient. [Conclusions] In order to provide more comprehensive and scientific measurement data,commercial database needs to improve its own business and data system for the evaluation of academic journals. In addition, the open academic misconduct detection system and expert reviewer database are used to check the quality of papers published in academic journals, so as to promote the scientific, impartial, and comprehensive evaluation system of academic journals based on commercial database.

Key words: Commercial database, Academic journal evaluation, Core journal, Open access, Expert library of reviewers