摘要：

【目的】从话语权视角构建学术期刊四维评价框架,推进话语权与期刊评价理论和实践的创新。【方法】采用文献调研、比较分析等方法梳理国内外期刊评价的研究现状,对话语权与学术话语权的概念进行界定,论述学术话语权的形成机理,在此基础上提出学术期刊四维评价框架与学术期刊话语权提升策略。【结果】学术期刊话语权由主体、内容、客体、渠道、效果5个话语形成要素有机配合、相互作用而成,其评价可从引导力、原创力、影响力和传播力4个维度展开,评价方法可从数据获取、数据分析、模型构建和模型应用4个方面进行创新。【结论】以多维度、多要素、多指标、多方法融合评价学术期刊话语权是大数据环境下的必然选择。要提升学术期刊话语权,就要树立学术地位,挖掘热点领域,构建多元立体的传播格局,紧跟全球挑战和需求变化,构建中国特色学术话语体系。

关键词: 学术期刊, 学术话语权, 话语权评价, 学术引导力, 学术原创力, 学术传播力, 学术影响力

Abstract:

[Purposes] This paper constructs a four-dimensional evaluation framework for academic journals from a discourse perspective to promote innovation in the theory and practice of discourse and journal evaluation. [Methods] This paper used literature research, comparative analysis, and other methods to sort out the current situation of journal evaluation studies in China and abroad, defined the concept of discourse and academic discourse, discussed the formation mechanism of academic discourse, and proposed a four-dimensional evaluation framework for academic journals and strategies to improve the discourse of academic journals on this basis. [Findings] Academic journal discourse is made up of five discourse-forming elements: subject, content, object, channel, and effect, which cooperate and interact with each other. The evaluation can be developed from four dimensions: guidance, originality, influence, and communication. The evaluation methods can be innovated in terms of four aspects: data acquisition, data analysis, model construction, and model application. [Conclusions] Multi-dimensional, multi-element, multi-indicator, and multi-method fusion evaluation of academic journal discourse is an inevitable choice in the big data environment. In order to enhance the discourse of academic journals, it is necessary to establish academic status, tap into hot areas, set up a diversified and multi-dimensional communication pattern, keep up with global challenges and changes in demand, and build an academic discourse system with Chinese characteristics.

Key words: Academic journal, Academic discourse, Discourse evaluation, Academic guidance, Academic originality, Academic communication power, Academic influence