| 齐蘅.学术期刊同行评审专家审稿行为及其优化研究[J].,2022,(4):111-116 |
| 学术期刊同行评审专家审稿行为及其优化研究 |
| Research on Peer Review Behavior of Academic Journals and its Optimization |
| 投稿时间：2022-07-25 |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 学术期刊 同行评议 审稿专家 审稿质量 |
| English Keywords:academic journals peer review review expert review quality ( |
| Fund Project: |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 421 |
| 全文下载次数: 181 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 同行评审专家审稿已成为学术期刊决定稿件是否录用的关键环节,是增强期刊选稿科学性、提升作者学术论文水平、推动同行学术交流的重要保证。但同行评审专家在提升学术期刊审稿质量的同时,出现评审影响交叉学科学术创新、因尽责不足影响期刊稿件评审质量、因人情关系影响审稿客观公正等问题。归根结底均缘于学科壁垒导致同行评审专家难以突破领域界限、权责不等使其难以享受应有之权、因监督缺失难以完全理性评议。文章提出拓展同行评审专家角色定位、完善审稿激励机制、建立同行评审专家审稿质量评价制度等建议。 |
| English Summary: |
| Peer review expert manuscript review has become a key link for academic journals to decide whether to hire manuscripts. It is an important guarantee to enhance the scientificity of journal manuscript selection, improve the level of authors' academic papers, and promote peer academic exchanges. However, while peer review experts improve the quality of peer review of academic journals, there are some problems, such as the impact of review on interdisciplinary academic innovation, the impact on the quality of journal manuscript review due to lack of due diligence, and the impact on the objectivity and fairness of peer review due to human relations. In the final analysis, it is due to the disciplinary barriers that make it difficult for peer review experts to break through the boundaries of the field, the unequal rights and responsibilities, making it difficult for them to enjoy their due rights, and the lack of supervision makes it difficult for them to fully evaluate rationally. Suggestions are put forward to expand the role of peer review experts, improve the incentive mechanism for peer review, and establish a peer review and expert review quality evaluation system. |
| 查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
|
| 关闭 |
|
|
|