科技期刊专家审稿结论特性分析  

Characteristics of peer reviewer's conclusion for sci-tech journal papers

作　　者：赵丽莹[1] 苗秀芝 国荣[2] ZHAO Liying;MIAO Xiuzhi;GUO Rong(Editorial Department of Journal of Harbin Institute of Technology, 150001, Harbin, China)

机构地区：[1]<哈尔滨工业大学学报>编辑部,哈尔滨150001 [2]<西安交通大学学报(医学版)>编辑部,西安710061

出　　处：《编辑学报》2017年第6期528-532,共5页Acta Editologica

摘　　要：为了研究科技期刊专家审稿中存在的一些规律和特性,对《哈尔滨工业大学学报》20位核心审稿专家的485个审稿结论进行统计分析。界定"共识率"和"命中率"2项指标,对审稿结论分布、"共识率"和"命中率"进行比较分析。结果表明:审稿结论的总体分布比较合理和均衡,但是个体之间审稿结论分布差异明显;"非共识"结论在专家审稿中经常发生,甚至略高于"共识"结论出现的概率;"命中率"受"录用率"影响,如果"录用率"低,则给出更多否定性审稿结论的专家"命中率"高;"共识率"和"命中率"都有局限性,很难准确评估专家的审稿质量。建议编辑部通过发挥编辑主观能动性、优化审稿流程、广泛应用信息技术手段等方式来减少专家审稿的偏差,保证科技期刊的学术质量。To study the characteristics of peer review for sci-tech journal papers,485 peer reviewers＇ conclusions,which were made by 20 core peer reviewers from Journal of Harbin Institute of Technology, were selected and analyzed statistically. The distribution of the peer reviewers＇ conclusion,the hit rate and the consensus rate were compared and analyzed to define the hit rate and consensus rate quantitatively. The results show that： the overall distribution of all the peer reviewers ＇conclusions is even and reasonable,but the distribution of a specific peer reviewer＇s conclusions is obviously uneven; the non-consensus conclusions,which are frequently made by different peer reviewers, happen slightly more than the consensus conclusions; if the acceptance rate is low,the hit rate of the peer reviewer＇s conclusions of rejection is high,which means the acceptance rate affects the hit rate; both hit rate and consensus rate are limited to evaluate the peer reviewers＇ comments. It suggests that the editorial department should promote editor＇s activeness,optimize the reviewing progress and apply IT method to reduce the bias of peer reviewer＇s conclusion,which will ensure the quality of the technical journal.

关 键 词：科技期刊审稿 审稿结论分析 共识率 命中率 

分 类 号：G232[文化科学]