摘要：

【目的】 从创新性和影响力两个角度对SCIE收录的我国科技期刊进行评价,分析基于不同评价视角的科技期刊排名和文献分布的差异,探究不同指标评价结果与同行评议结果间的一致程度,以助力对现有科技期刊评价体系的改进与完善。【方法】 选择机械工程、环境科学、综合性材料科学、数学4个领域的37种SCIE收录的我国科技期刊及病毒学领域的28种SCIE收录的我国科技期刊作为研究对象。从JCR和开放引文数据库中分别获取被选期刊的影响因子(JIF)、期刊引证指数(JCI)、JCR分区及研究文献引用关系等数据,分别计算每篇研究文献的绝对颠覆性指数和期刊颠覆性指数(JDI)并进行比较分析,使用《高质量科技期刊分级目录》验证JDI的评价效果。【结果】 在所选的5个领域中,创新性排名与影响力排名相同的期刊占比不足1/4。在除环境科学以外的4个领域中JCI与JDI排名的差异最小,而在除机械工程以外的4个领域中JIF与JDI差异最大。在影响力/创新性分区中,研究文献分布较为均衡。在特定期刊内部,研究文献的创新水平参差不齐。相比影响力指标,JDI与权威专家的同行评议结果更为一致。【结论】 期刊的影响力排名和创新性排名间存在较大差异。影响力指标不能较好地体现期刊及其发表文献的创新水平。在病毒学领域,国内科技期刊对颠覆性创新成果的吸引力仍有待提升。

关键词: 科技期刊, 期刊评价, 创新性评价, 颠覆性创新, 颠覆性指数

Abstract:

[Purposes] This paper evaluates Chinese SCIE-indexed scientific journals from two perspectives: innovation and influence, analyzes the differences in ranking and paper distribution of scientific journals based on different evaluation perspectives, and explores the consistency between evaluation results of different indicators and peer review results, so as to improve and perfect the existing evaluation system of scientific journals. [Methods] Based on 37 Chinese SCIE-indexed scientific journals in China in mechanical engineering, environmental science, interdisciplinary material science, and mathematics and 28 Chinese SCIE-indexed scientific journals in virology, the data of journal impact factor (JIF), journal citation indicator (JCI), JCR partition, and citation relationship of research papers of selected journals were obtained from JCR and OpenCitations Index of Crossref open DOI-to-DOI citations respectively, and the absolute disruption index of each research paper and the journal disruption index (JDI) were calculated and compared. The evaluation effect of JDI was verified by using High-Quality Journal Classification Catalogue. [Findings] In the five fields selected, the percentage of journals with the same innovation ranking and impact ranking is less than 1/4. JCI has the smallest difference in ranking with JDI in four fields except for environmental science, while JIF has the largest difference with JDI in four fields other than mechanical engineering. In innovation/influence partition, the distribution of research papers is even. Within specific journals, the innovation level of research papers is scattered. Compared with the influence indicators, the evaluation results of JDI are more consistent with the peer review results of authoritative experts. [Conclusions] There are significant differences between the influence and innovation rankings of journals. The influence indicator fails to reflect the level of innovation of journals and papers. In the field of virology, the attractiveness of Chinese scientific journals for disruptive innovations still needs to be improved.

Key words: Scientific journal, Journal evaluation, Innovation evaluation, Disruptive innovation, Disruption index