学术期刊的质量与创新评价  

Quality and Innovativeness in the Evaluation of Academic Journals

作　　者：叶继元[1] 

机构地区：[1]南京大学信息管理学院,江苏南京210093

出　　处：《浙江大学学报（人文社会科学版）》2013年第2期108-117,共10页Journal of Zhejiang University:Humanities and Social Sciences

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大项目(04&ZD031)

摘　　要：目前我国学术期刊评价体系已初见端倪,但仍存在质量和创新力评价弱化、过分数量化、过分形式化、过分简单化(或官僚化、管理简单化)、评价主体淡化、评价结果软化等问题。这些问题的产生有着深刻的社会、经济、文化等原因。在保持原有期刊评价体系中某些合理因素的前提下,可采用形式评价、内容评价和效用评价的新概念组合,形成新的同行专家评价与引文等文献计量评价相结合的评价方法和新的评价指标体系,以期更好地推动学术期刊评价工作逐步走上科学发展轨道。Academic journal is an important medium of research publication and academic exchange. The academic journal evaluation system in China has been initially established, but quality and innovativeness evaluations are still weak. There are profound socio-economic, cultural, administrative reasons for this problem, which have caused negative impact on the value orientation of scholars and their research behavior, affected the objectivity and impartiality of academic evaluation, and undermined the cleanness and pureness of the academia. Scholars of the humanities and social sciences and library and information science experts have already reached a consensus that academic evaluation in the humanities and social sciences should be more diverse, localized and content-based, and there should be quality and innovativeness evaluations. In the past dozen years, academic journal evaluation is mainly quantitative and formal, but now more emphasis should be placed on content evaluation and innovativeness evaluation to create a fair and free environment for academic journal evaluation. On the premise of maintaining the reasonable elements in the existing academic journal evaluation system, this article proposes a combination of three new concepts including formal evaluation, content evaluation and effectiveness evaluation, and puts forward a new evaluation method integrating peerreview and bibliometric evaluation. The proposed combination of the three new concepts would be able to explain the history and the current situation of journal evaluation, and also predict its future. The aim of the new thinking and the approach to realize it is to overcome the institutional obstacles that hinder the healthy development of academic evaluation, to establish a fair and rational academic environment for scholars, and to create an open and constructive academic environment in the future.

关 键 词：学术期刊 期刊评价 内容评价 效用评价 

分 类 号：G231[文化科学]