【目的】 揭示强制引用判别面临的引用必要性与非必要性、自愿性与非自愿性、强制性与非强制性困境的产生根源,提出走出困境的对策建议。【方法】 利用逻辑分析法、案例分析法和情境分析法,探析强制引用判别困境的产生原因与应对方法。【结果】 强制引用判别本质上属于评价性认识,由修辞价值诉求衍生的自由裁量空间、学术范式差异和多元主体的价值冲突是产生引用必要性评判困境的重要原因;根据自愿性与非自愿性内涵的差异,叠加形成引用自愿性与非自愿性判别的8种情形;根据引用强制性生成方式不同,可将强制引用划分为“直白压服型”“隐蔽限定型”“规训引导型”3种类型。【结论】 破解判别强制引用的困境可考虑采取小同行评审、非必要不引用原则、修辞性引用最优化原则、建立学术信用制度等应对措施。
[Purposes] This paper reveals the origin of the dilemma in distinguishing between necessary and unnecessary, voluntary and involuntary, and mandatory and non-mandatory citations in the judgment of coercive citation, and puts forward countermeasures against the dilemma. [Methods] With the methods of logical analysis, case analysis, and scenario analysis, we analyzed the reasons for the dilemma and the countermeasures. [Findings] The judgment of coercive citation is evaluative in nature. The free discretion space derived from rhetorical value appeal, the difference of academic paradigm, and the value conflict of multiple subjects are the important reasons for the dilemma of the judgment of necessity of citation. According to the difference in connotation of voluntariness and involuntariness, eight scenarios on voluntariness and involuntariness are proposed. According to the generation method of coerciveness, the coercive citations can be classified into three types: straightforward-coercive citation, covert-restricting citation, and disciplining-inductive citation. [Conclusions] The following suggestions are proposed to tackle the dilemma of judging coercive citation: small peer review, no citing unless necessary, optimization of rhetorical citation, and establishment of academic credit system.