摘要：

目的 在同行评议论文首发情境下，分析科技期刊介入科研成果普及的现实基础、关键环节与实践重点。 方法 采用规范分析、文献研究与案例比较相结合的方法，在梳理科技期刊制度功能、成果转述与平台传播相关研究的基础上，围绕源文组织、刊媒衔接构建分析框架，并选取中外综合性代表期刊，结合论文页、新闻稿、专题页及社交媒体发布等公开材料展开考察。 结果 科技期刊科研成果普及，是其首发、同行评议组织和编辑把关等制度功能在公共传播环节的延伸。由比较结果可以看出，国际综合性科技期刊在论文发表后的源文组织和刊媒衔接方面较为成熟，中国综合性科技期刊则在本土议题组织、专题化表达与传播触达方面表现较为突出，但在前端传播组织的结构化配置和传播接口稳定性方面仍有提升空间。进一步看，科技期刊科研成果普及的重点受期刊类型、学科情境与办刊条件共同影响。 结论 科技期刊科研成果普及的关键，在于形成由源文组织和刊媒衔接构成的前端传播组织机制。科技期刊科研成果普及能力建设不宜沿用单一标准，而应结合期刊类型、学科性质与资源条件分类推进。

关键词: 科技期刊, 科研成果普及, 源文组织, 刊媒衔接, 组织机制

Abstract:

Purposes Against the backdrop of the coordinated advancement of scientific and technological innovation and science popularization， this study focuses on the publication stage of peer-reviewed papers to examine the practical basis， key links， and major priorities of scientific journals’ engagement in the popularization of research outcomes. Methods This study adopts a combination of normative analysis， literature review， and comparative case analysis. Building on previous studies on the institutional functions of scientific journals， the translation of research outcomes， and platform-based dissemination， it develops an analytical framework centered on source-text organization and journal-media articulation. Representative Chinese and international general scientific journals are then selected for examination on the basis of publicly available materials， including article pages， press releases， special-topic pages， graphical abstracts， video content， and platform postings. Findings Scientific journals’ engagement in the popularization of research outcomes constitutes an extension of their institutional functions-namely first publication， peer-review organization， and editorial gatekeeping-into the sphere of public communication. Comparative analysis shows that international general scientific journals are relatively more mature in post-publication source-text organization and journal-media articulation， whereas Chinese general scientific journals demonstrate particular strengths in the organization of domestically salient topics， thematic presentation， and communication reach. Nevertheless， they still have room for improvement in the structural configuration of front-end communication and the stability of communication interfaces. More broadly， the priorities of popularization of research outcomes are jointly shaped by journal type， disciplinary context， and publishing conditions. Conclusions The key to the popularization of research outcomes by scientific journals lies in establishing a front-end communication mechanism composed of source-text organization and journal-media articulation. Capacity building in this area should not follow a one-size-fits-all approach； rather， implementation pathways should be advanced in a differentiated manner according to journal type， disciplinary characteristics， and resource conditions.

Key words: Scientific journals, Popularization of research outcomes, Source-text organization, Journal-media articulation, Organizational mechanisms