中国科技期刊研究 ›› 2019, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (8): 819-826.doi: 10.11946/cjstp.201903190187

• 论坛 • 上一篇    下一篇

我国学术期刊同行评议研究综述

付伟棠1,)2)   

  1. 1) 南京大学信息管理学院,江苏省南京市栖霞区仙林大道163号 210023
    2) 广东省立中山图书馆《图书馆论坛》编辑部,广东省广州市越秀区文明路213号 510110
  • 收稿日期:2019-03-19 修回日期:2019-06-10 出版日期:2019-08-15 发布日期:2019-08-30
  • 作者简介:付伟棠(ORCID:0000-0001-7070-0289),博士研究生,编辑,E-mail: zaoyudianying@126.com

Overview of peer review of Chinese academic journals

FU Weitang1,)2)   

  1. 1) School of Information Management, Nanjing University, 163 Xianlin Road, Qixia District, Nanjing 210023, China
    2) Editorial Office of Journal of Library Tribune, Sun Yat-sen Library of Guangdong Province, 213 Wenming Road, Yuexiu District, Guangzhou 510110, China
  • Received:2019-03-19 Revised:2019-06-10 Online:2019-08-15 Published:2019-08-30

摘要:

【目的】分析我国学术期刊同行评议发展现状、面对的挑战以及相应的对策,较全面掌握相关研究的成果,以期推动我国学术期刊同行评议的成熟发展。【方法】以中国知网为数据源检索得到学术期刊同行评议文献105篇,再对文献内容进行主题归纳、梳理与分析。【结果】我国开展学术期刊同行评议制度研究的历史较短,发展还不成熟,当前的文献研究表明,学术期刊同行评议尽管作用很大,但在作者、评议专家、编辑和学术环境4个方面都面临挑战,而当前的对策研究主要以改善传统同行评议的流程为主,也有一些探索同行评议新方式的尝试。【结论】尽管学术期刊同行评议面临众多的质疑,但目前来说仍然无法被取代。

关键词: 同行评议, 学术期刊, 学术评价, 开放式同行评议

Abstract:

[Purposes] This article aims to analyze the current situation, challenges,and countermeasures of peer review of academic journals in China, and grasp the results of relevant studies in an all-round way, so as to promote the mature development of peer review of academic journals in China. [Methods] A total of 105 articles on peer-review of academic journals were obtained from CNKI as a data source, and the contents of the literature were summarized, sorted out, and analyzed. [Findings] The research on peer review of academic journals has a short history and immature development in China. Current literature studies show that although peer review plays an important role in academic journals, it faces challenges in four aspects: authors, peer reviewers, editors, and academic environment. Current countermeasures in the literature mainly focus on improving the traditional peer review process, and there are also attempts to explore new ways of peer review. [Conclusions] Although peer review of academic journals faces many doubts, it cannot be replaced at present.

Key words: Peer review, Academic journal, Academic evaluation, Open peer review