中国科技期刊研究 ›› 2016, Vol. 27 ›› Issue (3): 278-282. doi: 10.11946/cjstp.201510100973

• 质量建设 • 上一篇    下一篇

科技期刊外审专家激励措施扎根研究

钟琳1),高超民2)   

  1. 1) 右江民族医学院学报编辑部,广西百色市城乡路98号 533000
    2) 百色学院工商管理学院,广西百色市中山二路21号 533000
  • 收稿日期:2015-10-10 修回日期:2015-12-09 出版日期:2016-03-15 发布日期:2016-03-15
  • 作者简介:钟琳(ORCID:0000-0002-6683-8813),硕士研究生,编辑,E-mail: zhonglin113@126.com|高超民,博士研究生,高级工程师。
  • 基金资助:
    2016年度广西壮族自治区中青年教师基础能力提升项目“出版数字化背景下高校科技期刊人才激励研究”

A grounded study on incentivemeasures for external expert reviewers in scientific journals

ZHONG Lin1),GAO Chaom in2)   

  1. 1) Editorial Department of Journal of Youjiang Medical University for Nationalites, 98 Chengxiang Road, Baise 533000, China
    2) College of Business Adm inistration, Baise University, 21 Baise Zhongshan Second Road, Baise 533000, China
  • Received:2015-10-10 Revised:2015-12-09 Online:2016-03-15 Published:2016-03-15

摘要:

【目的】为科技期刊激励外审专家措施提供系统理论支撑。【方法】依据扎根理论的思想,选择16名科技期刊外审专家进行访谈,对访谈数据进行整理分析和对比,找到影响科技期刊外审专家审稿意愿的因素,进行归类和关系确定后,构建科技期刊外审专家审稿意愿模型。【结果】外审专家的审稿意愿受到效价性因素和成本性因素的双重影响,效价越高审稿意愿越强,而成本越高审稿意愿越低;效价性因素包括学术地位、学术水平、掌控感、启发思维、情感体验和社会贡献,而成本性因素包括时间成本和精力成本。【结论】科技期刊应提高掌控感、启发思维等审稿效价并降低审稿的时间和精力成本。

关键词: 科技期刊, 外审专家, 扎根理论, 激励

Abstract:

[Purposes] This article aims to provide a system theory to support incentive measures for external expert reviewers in scientific journals.[Methods] Follow ing the idea of the Grounded Theory, 16 external expert reviewers of scientific journals are chosen for an interview.The interview data are collected and analytically compared for finding out the factors that affect the peerreview intention of external experts in scientific journals.A fter the details are categorized and the relationship is identified,the peerreview intention model for external experts in scientific journals is constructed.[Findings] Valence factors and cost factors doubly influence the peer-review intention of external experts.The higher the valence is, the stronger the peer-review intention is; and the higher the cost is, the lower the peer-review intention is.The valence factors include academic status, academ ic standards, control sense, enlightening thought, sentimental experience and social contributions; and cost factors include time cost and energy cost.[Conclusions] Scientific journals should improve the peer-review valence such as academ ic status, control sense, etc., and lower the time and energy costs.

Key words: Scientific journal, External expert reviewer, Grounded Theory, Incentive