【目的】 研究“双一流”高校工科学报校内发文量与学术影响力间的关系,探讨学报发挥自身优势,提升期刊学术质量,继续推动高校和学科建设的策略。【方法】 依据中国知网期刊数据库及《中国科技期刊引证报告(核心版)》统计24种“双一流”高校工科学报2012年、2014年、2016年和2018年的校内发文量、影响因子、被引频次、基金论文比、综合排名,辅以EI收录期刊、“中国科技期刊卓越行动计划”入选期刊的情况。【结果】 有18种高校学报的校内发文比例较高,具有较强的内向性;大部分学报的校内发文比例呈下降或波动稳定趋势,开放办刊的同时也流失了部分校内优质稿件;基金论文比普遍较高;23种学报的影响因子在0.5上下波动,特色优势不明显。由此可见,校内发文比例不直接决定学报的学术影响力,更为重要的是要积极拓展稿源,提升论文质量。【结论】 “双一流”高校工科学报需要依托高校优势学科,设定特色栏目吸引特色论文;挖掘本校学者资源,提升校内发文质量;坚持科学评价导向,让高校涌现的高水平成果落地生根,推进大学各学科发展,共创一流。
[Purposes] This paper explores the relationship between the number of internal papers and academic influence of engineering journals in double first-class universities, and discusses the strategies to improve the academic quality of these journals and promote the development of disciplines and universities via the advantages of these journals. [Methods] According to CNKI journal database and Chinese S&T Journal Citation Reports, the number of internal papers, impact factor, cited frequency, proportion of funded papers, and overall rank of the 24 engineering journals in double first-class universities in 2012, 2014, 2016, and 2018 were respectively statistically analyzed. Meanwhile, among them, the EI-indexed journals and journals funded by Excellence Action Plan for of China STM Journals were surveyed. [Findings] A total of 18 journals had high proportion of internal papers, showing strong introversion, and most of the 24 journals saw declining or stable (with fluctuation) proportions of internal papers, losing some high-quality contributions due to the opening policy. In addition, the proportion of funded papers was generally high for these 24 journals. A total of 23 journals had the impact factors fluctuating around 0.5, with unobvious characteristic advantages. Therefore, contributions and paper quality, instead of the proportion of internal papers, were the determining factors of the academic influence of these journals. [Conclusions] Engineering journals of double first-class universities should set up characteristic columns basing on the preponderant disciplines to attract characteristic papers, explore excellent scholars to improve the quality of internal papers, and adhere to the scientific evaluation-oriented principle, thereby attracting the high-quality research outcomes, promoting the in-depth development of university disciplines, and achieving the first-class level.
Double first-class university,
Number of internal papers,