高校学报网站同行评议伦理规范的调查与完善建议  

Investigation of the peer-review ethics on websites of university scientific journals and improving suggestions

作　　者：徐婷婷[1] XU Tingting(Editorial Office of Journal of Xiamen University(Natural Science),422 South Siming Road,Siming District,Xiamen 361005,China)

机构地区：[1]《厦门大学学报(自然科学版)》编辑部,361005

出　　处：《中国科技期刊研究》2021年第7期859-865,共7页Chinese Journal of Scientific and Technical Periodicals

基　　金：福建省品牌刊社培育计划种子期刊资助项目。

摘　　要：【目的】调查代表性高校学报网站发布的同行评议伦理规范内容,针对薄弱环节提出完善建议。【方法】基于高校主办的73种代表性中文科技期刊,调查网站上同行评议伦理规范的发布情况,并对具体内容进行词频和属性分析。【结果】仅12种期刊的网站公开发布了同行评议伦理规范内容,但部分栏目指示不明确,内容涵盖不全面,薄弱环节主要体现在虚假信息的核查、独立评审的要求和异议申诉的流程3方面。【结论】所调查网站发布的内容显示高校学报的同行评议伦理规范建设尚存在薄弱环节,须基于制度公开、保持独立和正视申诉3个原则进一步完善。[Purposes]This paper investigates the peer-review ethics on websites of some representative university scientific journals and puts forward related suggestions. [Methods] The peer-review ethics on websites of 73 representative university scientific journals were probed and the word frequency and content attributes were analyzed. [Findings]Only 12 journals released peer-review ethics on official websites,despite the inconspicuous column and incomplete information. Journals should further improve the peerreview ethics in the handling of fake peer-review information,review independency,and appeal for dissent. [Conclusions] There are some problems in the construction of peer-review ethics of university scientific journals and such problems should be solved based on the principle of opening,independency,and envisaging of appeal.

关 键 词：高校学报 同行评议 伦理规范 独立评审 异议申诉 

分 类 号：G237.5[文化科学]