摘要：

【目的】 深入了解期刊利益相关者对期刊质量的意见,显化隐性知识,形成具有共识性的社科学术期刊质量评价维度。【方法】 首先,对受访者开展6轮凯利方格访谈,从访谈资料中挖掘出43个期刊质量评价维度构念。随后,请206位受访者进行构念重要程度打分。汇总整理数据后,剔除平均得分低和解释度不高的构念,对剩余构念采用主成分分析降维。【结果】 最终形成6个具有共识性的社科期刊质量评价维度——规范性、创新性、专业性、重要性、影响力和吸引力,以及一系列子维度。【结论】 6个评价维度可更为全面地反映期刊学术质量,为多维度期刊评价、多维度结果呈现、期刊多元化发展提供支持。

关键词: 凯利方格访谈, 社科学术期刊, 评价维度

Abstract:

[Purposes] This paper aims to gather the opinions of the stakeholders on the quality of journals and reveal the tacit knowledge, in order to form the most common evaluation dimensions of social science academic journals. [Methods] Respondents were interviewed with Kelly repertory grid technique for six rounds, and 43 constructs about the dimensions of journal quality evaluation were extracted from the interview data. Then, 206 respondents were asked to score the importance of these constructs. After data collection and collation, the constructs with low average score and low variance explained were excluded, and the dimensions of the remaining constructs were reduced by principal component analysis. [Findings] Six common quality evaluation dimensions: standardization, innovation, professionalism, importance, influence, and attraction, as well as a series of sub-dimensions were formed. [Conclusions] The six dimensions can comprehensively reflect the academic quality of journals, which support the multi-dimensional evaluation of journals, multi-dimensional presentation of results, and diversified development of journals.

Key words: Kelly repertory grid technique, Social science academic journal, Evaluation dimension