Abstract:

[Purposes] The authors' feedback on academic journals in the third-party website "fabiaoji" is analyzed, which reveals authors' cognition and emotional perceptions towards journals in the submission process and provides insights for journals in improving effectiveness. [Methods] This paper used "bazhuayu" crawler software to collect the authors' feedback data, and the text analysis and ROST CM 6.0 software were adopted for word segmentation and word frequency analysis. A semantic network was constructed, and emotional analysis was carried out. [Findings] Most academic journals do not have submission feedback. Almost all the journals with feedback are core journals, and the number of social science journals is high. The high-frequency words of authors' concerns are summarized as submission results, review process, manuscript processing cycle, communication with the editorial board, cost issues, topic preference, academic title preference, etc. The semantic network of authors' feedback data shows a hierarchical structure of "core-edge". Authors' feedback is mainly positive, with neutral and negative emotions ranking second and third. [Conclusions] The most significant factors affecting the authors' cognition and feedback are the journal's review speed, publication timeliness, communication attitude, and fee rate. Journals should pay attention to authors' feelings about submission, construct a good image of journal submissions, and attract and retain excellent author groups; they should also improve the existing journal management system, give full play to the role of academic communities, pay attention to peer review, ensure journal review quality, and establish a sound communication mechanism with authors to provide timely feedback on the review.

Key words: Academic journal, Cognition of submission, Authors' feedback, Semantic network, Emotional perception

摘要： 【目的】 分析第三方网站“发表记”中作者对学术期刊的投稿评论,揭示作者对期刊的投稿认知和情感感知,为期刊改进工作效能提供参考。 【方法】 利用八爪鱼爬虫软件爬取作者评论数据,使用文本分析法并借助ROST CM 6.0软件进行分词和词频分析,构建语义网络并进行情感分析。 【结果】 大部分学术期刊并无投稿评论,大部分有评论的期刊是核心期刊,且社科期刊数量较多。作者关注的高频词包括投稿结果、审稿过程、稿件处理周期、与编辑部沟通、费用问题、选题偏好、学历职称偏好等。作者评论数据的语义网络呈现出“核心-边缘”的层级结构。作者评论内容以正向情感为主,中性情感居第二位,负向情感最少。 【结论】 期刊的审稿速度、出版时效、沟通态度、收费标准是最显著的投稿认知与作者评论的影响因素。期刊应当重视作者的投稿感受,建构良好的投稿形象,吸引并留住优秀作者群体;完善现有期刊管理体制,充分发挥学术共同体的作用;重视同行评议,保证期刊审稿质量;建立健全与作者的沟通机制,及时反馈审阅意见。

关键词: 学术期刊, 投稿认知, 作者评论, 语义网络, 情感感知