开放科学环境中的科技期刊同行评议研究  

Peer review of scientific journals in an open science era

作　　者：胡克兴 刘徽 卢珊 李响 孟凡霞 韩丽[2] 盛怡瑾 HU Kexing;LIU Hui;LU Shan;LI Xiang;MENG Fanxia;HAN Li;SHENG Yijin

机构地区：[1]《中国科学》杂志社,100717 [2]中国科学院微生物研究所《菌物学报》编辑部,100101 [3]中国科学院文献情报中心,北京100190

出　　处：《编辑学报》2019年第6期610-613,共4页Acta Editologica

基　　金：中国科协科技期刊青年编辑业务研究择优支持项目(castqk 2017-qnkt-05)

摘　　要：本研究通过问卷调查、文献和个案研究等方法,调研了现行科技期刊同行评议的类型模式,期刊编辑和科研人员对不同评议模式的认可度,以及对新型平台和工具的接受和参与程度,分析了预印本和Publons对同行评议的影响。文章提出,在开放科学环境下,应将盲审模式与开放同行评议有机结合,探索最优评议模式,以提升同行评议质量、效率和透明度,同时要鼓励中国科学家深度融入国际科技期刊同行评议活动,以进一步为我国科技期刊学术质量和国际影响力的提升发挥作用,为建设世界一流科技期刊的国家战略需求服务。Through surveys,literature review,and case study,this study investigated the currently used peer review methods by scientific journals,the recognition of different peer review methods by journal editors and researchers,their participation in emerging peer review tools and platforms. We suggest that scientific journals improve their peer review quality,efficiency,and transparency by combining blind review with open review to find an optimal peer review mode. Chinese scientists should be encouraged to contribute more to the international academic community by reviewing more papers,which may be helpful to improve the academic quality and international influence of China’s academic journals in response to the national strategic needs of building world-leading scientific journals.

关 键 词：开放科学 科技期刊 同行评议 预印本 Publons 调查研究 

分 类 号：G237.5[文化科学]