第三方审稿平台及其在国内科技期刊领域实施的可行性
|
摘要
【目的】借鉴国际科技期刊同行评议的经验,进一步推动中文科技期刊同行评议方式的研究、改革和实践。【方法】通过文献综述和网站调研的方法,介绍国际上第三方审稿平台的运行模式和发展状况,提出创新国内科技期刊审稿方式的建议。【结果】独立于期刊的第三方审稿服务颠覆了传统模式中审稿人、作者、编辑之间的关系,具有公开、公平和公正的特点,既可以加快期刊内容的传播速度,又能提高审稿人的积极性,还能提高稿源质量和期刊质量。【结论】由期刊集群建立第三方审稿服务平台,可规范服务流程,在我国科技期刊领域中具有可行性。
[Purposes]Taking examples by the experience in peer review of international scientific journals,we will further promote the research,reform,and practice of peer review methods in Chinese scientific journals. [Methods]Through the literature review and websites research,the operation mode and development status of the independent peer review platforms abroad were introduced,and the practical feasibility of implementing the independent peer review in Chinese scientific journal publishing was discussed.[Findings]The independent peer review service completely subverts the relationship among reviewers,authors,and editors in the traditional model,which is characterized by openness,fairness,and impartiality. The speed of content dissemination can be accelerated by the enthusiasm of reviewers,and the quality of manuscripts and journals can be improved. [Conclusions] It is feasible to establish an independent peer review service platform and to standardize service process by a journal group in the field of Chinese scientific journals.
[Purposes]Taking examples by the experience in peer review of international scientific journals,we will further promote the research,reform,and practice of peer review methods in Chinese scientific journals. [Methods]Through the literature review and websites research,the operation mode and development status of the independent peer review platforms abroad were introduced,and the practical feasibility of implementing the independent peer review in Chinese scientific journal publishing was discussed.[Findings]The independent peer review service completely subverts the relationship among reviewers,authors,and editors in the traditional model,which is characterized by openness,fairness,and impartiality. The speed of content dissemination can be accelerated by the enthusiasm of reviewers,and the quality of manuscripts and journals can be improved. [Conclusions] It is feasible to establish an independent peer review service platform and to standardize service process by a journal group in the field of Chinese scientific journals.
引文
[1] Jubb M. Peer review:the current landscape and future trends[J].Learned Publishing,2016,29(1):13-21.
[2] Walker R,da Silva P R. Emerging trends in peerreview-a survey[J]. Frontiers in Neuroscience,2015,9:169.
[3] Nicholas D,Watkinson A,Jamali H R,et al. Peer review:still king in the digital age[J]. Learned Publishing,2015,28(1):15-21.
[4] Bj9rk B C,Hedlund T. Emerging new methods of peer review in scholarly journals[J]. Learned Publishing,2015,28(2):85-91.
[5]徐书令,房威.学术论文同行评审:过去·现状·未来[J].编辑学报,2016,28(6):535-538.
[6]陈培颖,陈倩,李娜,等.国内学术期刊同行评议现状的调研——基于国内自动化领域作者群和评审专家群[J].中国科技期刊研究,2016,27(1):3-9.
[7]黄历,孙佳楠,江敏,等.第三方审稿服务平台Rubriq的启示[M]∥刘志强.学报编辑论丛.上海:上海大学出版社,2016:271-275.
[8] Warne V. Rewarding reviewers-sense or sensibility? A Wiley study explained[J]. Learned Publishing,2016,29(1):41-50.
[9]曾群. Publons对传统审稿模式的改变[J].科技与出版,2018(5):60-64.
[10]王炎龙,邱子昊.科技期刊刊群建设与影响力重构探究[J].中国科技期刊研究,2017,28(9):781-787.
[11]朱琳,刘静,刘培一,等.中国科协刊群建设动力机制及发展措施探析[J].中国科技期刊研究,2017,28(2):190-194.
[12]中国科协创新战略研究院.《科技中国梦建功新时代》倡议书[EB/OL].[2018-06-02]. http:∥www.nais.com.cn/html/19/ywjj/2018/0605/1351.html.
[13]中国科学技术协会.中国科技期刊发展蓝皮书(2017)[M].北京:科学出版社,2018.
[14]中国新闻网. 2017年中国研发经费总投入1.75万亿元居世界第二[EB/OL].[2018-02-13]. http:∥www. chinanews.com/cj/2018/02-13/8448274.shtml.
[2] Walker R,da Silva P R. Emerging trends in peerreview-a survey[J]. Frontiers in Neuroscience,2015,9:169.
[3] Nicholas D,Watkinson A,Jamali H R,et al. Peer review:still king in the digital age[J]. Learned Publishing,2015,28(1):15-21.
[4] Bj9rk B C,Hedlund T. Emerging new methods of peer review in scholarly journals[J]. Learned Publishing,2015,28(2):85-91.
[5]徐书令,房威.学术论文同行评审:过去·现状·未来[J].编辑学报,2016,28(6):535-538.
[6]陈培颖,陈倩,李娜,等.国内学术期刊同行评议现状的调研——基于国内自动化领域作者群和评审专家群[J].中国科技期刊研究,2016,27(1):3-9.
[7]黄历,孙佳楠,江敏,等.第三方审稿服务平台Rubriq的启示[M]∥刘志强.学报编辑论丛.上海:上海大学出版社,2016:271-275.
[8] Warne V. Rewarding reviewers-sense or sensibility? A Wiley study explained[J]. Learned Publishing,2016,29(1):41-50.
[9]曾群. Publons对传统审稿模式的改变[J].科技与出版,2018(5):60-64.
[10]王炎龙,邱子昊.科技期刊刊群建设与影响力重构探究[J].中国科技期刊研究,2017,28(9):781-787.
[11]朱琳,刘静,刘培一,等.中国科协刊群建设动力机制及发展措施探析[J].中国科技期刊研究,2017,28(2):190-194.
[12]中国科协创新战略研究院.《科技中国梦建功新时代》倡议书[EB/OL].[2018-06-02]. http:∥www.nais.com.cn/html/19/ywjj/2018/0605/1351.html.
[13]中国科学技术协会.中国科技期刊发展蓝皮书(2017)[M].北京:科学出版社,2018.
[14]中国新闻网. 2017年中国研发经费总投入1.75万亿元居世界第二[EB/OL].[2018-02-13]. http:∥www. chinanews.com/cj/2018/02-13/8448274.shtml.