中国科技期刊研究 ›› 2019, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (9): 1003-1006.doi: 10.11946/cjstp.201904250312

• 能力建设 • 上一篇    下一篇

科技期刊论文学术观点冲突的应对及案例分析

栾嘉1),邓强庭1),黄超1),徐迪雄2)()   

  1. 1)《第三军医大学学报》编辑部,重庆市沙坪坝区高滩岩正街30号 400038
    2)陆军军医大学陆军特色医学中心,重庆市渝中区大坪长江支路10号 400042
  • 收稿日期:2019-04-25 修回日期:2019-08-19 出版日期:2019-09-15 发布日期:2019-09-15
  • 通讯作者: 徐迪雄 E-mail:xdx@tmmu.edu.cn
  • 作者简介:栾 嘉(ORCID:0000-0002-6258-5046),博士研究生,副编审,E-mail: luanjia@tmmu.edu.cn|邓强庭,硕士,编辑|黄 超,学士,助理编辑。
  • 基金资助:
    2018年度陆军军医大学人文社科基金重点项目(2018XRW3);重庆市高校期刊研究会2018年度基金资助一般项目(CQYB2018-2)

Editors' behavior on academic conflicts in scientific papers and a case analysis

LUAN Jia1),DENG Qiangting1),HUANG Chao1),XU Dixiong2)()   

  1. 1)Editorial Office of Journal of Third Military Medical University, 30 Gaotanyan Street, Shapingba District, Chongqing 400038, China
    2)Army Characteristic Medical Center, Army Medical University, 10 Changjiang Street, Yuzhong District, Chongqing 400042, China
  • Received:2019-04-25 Revised:2019-08-19 Online:2019-09-15 Published:2019-09-15
  • Contact: XU Dixiong E-mail:xdx@tmmu.edu.cn

摘要:

【目的】 探讨科技期刊遭遇学术观点冲突时相关编辑出版伦理问题与编辑行为规范,以防止利益冲突发生。【方法】 以国内某医学期刊新近发表的一篇专家述评遭遇被引作者申诉的案例为导线,通过集中讨论、文献查阅,为医学论文发生学术观点冲突事件进行客观定性并提出相应的预防措施。【结果】 ① 此次利益冲突的实质,在论文中体现为“学术观点冲突”;在现实中揭示出的是“学术竞争冲突”。② 编辑的医学知识受限是该事件的主要原因,编辑部流程管控不力是次要原因,此次利益冲突从编辑伦理的角度分析属于编辑“责任冲突”。③针对编辑角色行为规范提出:应珍视作者的学术声誉;树立“学术争鸣”以证据为基石的理念;审稿遭遇否定观点时要倍加审慎;充分评估“专家述评”作者的学术水平等。【结论】 强化编辑行为规范,系统学习、实时更新编辑出版伦理知识,是避免存在利益关系的学术观点冲突的有效途径。

关键词: 编辑出版伦理, 学术观点冲突, 编辑行为, 医学期刊, 同行评议

Abstract:

[Purposes] This paper discusses the code of conduct of editors in scientific journals when they encounter conflicts of academic views, in order to prevent conflicts of interest from occurring. [Methods] Taking the case of a newly published expert review in a domestic medical journal and the appeal of the cited author as a guide, we objectively characterized the conflict of academic views in medical papers through focused discussion and literature review, and put forward the corresponding solutions. [Findings] Firstly, the essence of the conflict of interest is reflected in this paper as discussion of academic views; it reveals discussion of academic competition in reality. Secondly, the limitation of medical specialty knowledge and the disorder of the workflow management of editorial offices are the reasons for the proposed conflict. It belongs to the editor's responsibility conflict from the perspective of editorial ethics. Finally, academic editors should value the authors' academic and personal reputation, attach great importance to the evidence, be careful when you have negative views of others, and fully evaluate the academic level of authors for the column of expert review. [Conclusions] To avoid the conflict of academic views of interest relations, editors of scientific journals should strengthen the editorial behavioral norms and systematically learn and update the ethics of publications in real time.

Key words: Editing publishing ethics, Conflict of academic views, Editor's behavior, Medical journal, Peer review