共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 218 毫秒
1.
论期刊编辑与作者关系的构建 总被引：2，自引：0，他引：2
期刊质量是期刊生存之本。基于此,分析期刊编辑为提高办刊水平,需要处理好同作者之间的关系:积极同相关专家和学者建立并保持联系、要善于发现成熟的作者、要善于培养有潜力的作者、要善待未名的一般作者,从而提高期刊的竞争力。 相似文献
2.
3.
总结了笔者多年来编辑工作经验,浅谈科技期刊的办刊实践与感受。依托单位优势,坚持特色办刊;建立同行专家审稿、编辑部加工整理、作者校对核实制度,对稿件严格把关,提升论文质量;突出期刊个性发展,加强期刊数字化出版,扩大期刊社会影响力,力争把期刊办成精品科技期刊。 相似文献
4.
邹韬奋先生曾经说过:“期刊的内容如果只是人云亦云,格式如果只是亦步亦趋,那是期刊的尾巴主义。”他强调:“没有个性或特色的期刊,发展更没有希望了。”准确的定位是办好期刊的前提条件,也是形成期刊特色的基础。 定位是从期刊宗旨、内容、形式、选题、作者、读者等方面对办刊方向和办刊思路的总体确定,即期刊所要表现的内容,依靠什么样的作者、选题和形式,满足哪一部分读者的阅读需求等等。准确的定位一方面能 相似文献
5.
6.
"双效""双爱"期刊:办刊人的最高追求 总被引：47，自引：43，他引：47
在获得第3届国家期刊奖之际,总结从事编辑工作20年来不断提出的一些办刊理念,以及在<中华内科杂志>进行多项创新性实践所取得的成效和办刊经验.提出了办刊人的最高追求:不仅要将期刊办成社会效益与经济效益完美结合的"双效"期刊,而且要使期刊成为读者和作者都喜爱的"双爱"期刊. 相似文献
7.
8.
科技期刊的运营需要专家的参与,专家资源对于期刊的重要性不言而喻;而无论专家是作为作者、读者还是审者、编者,其成长都离不开期刊提供的平台,期刊与专家的关系是彼此滋养、相互成就。《药学进展》近年来以专家为中心,通过积极采纳专家意见、分享专家观点、塑造专家品牌、满足专家需求,有效提高期刊组稿策划质量、营造开放办刊环境、提升期刊品牌价值、增强专家办刊动力,通过凝聚专家资源,有效推动期刊良性发展。 相似文献
9.
本文从作者、读者群体分布特点和交叉学科期刊评价体系两个方面,分析了我国新兴交叉领域科技期刊的发展困境。阐述了凝聚专家、编辑、作者、读者对于一流科技期刊建设的重要作用,并从增强专家在参与办刊过程中的归属感、满足感、主体意识,提升编辑对自身职业的认同感,尊重、挖掘和培养青年作者,多层次服务读者等方面,分享了《大数据》期刊的办刊经验和人才凝聚策略,以期为科技期刊人才凝聚力提升提供参考。 相似文献
10.
为加强全军军事学术核心期刊建设与管理,总部制定并颁发了《军事学核心期刊建设与管理规定》。本文作者根据军事学核心期刊建设与评估标准有关要求,从办刊方向、学术质量和基础建设三个方面对军事学术期刊建设创新发展进行了探讨。 相似文献
11.
互联网时代,虚假中文科技期刊网站大肆横行,不仅侵害作者权益、损害期刊声誉,对整个学术生态乃至网络信任、网络安全都构成巨大威胁.本文针对当前虚假中文科技期刊网站的现状,立足于平台信任视角,从政府部门—网络平台—学术期刊—投稿作者4个维度,探讨了虚假中文科技期刊网站的治理路径,以期推动良性的学术文化生态,建立健康的科技期刊网络运行环境. 相似文献
12.
13.
2014年以来,医学期刊编辑国际委员会(ICMJE)对《学术研究实施与报告和医学期刊编辑与发表的推荐规范》进行了多次的修订,介绍《ICMJE推荐规范》体系架构,并从淡化期刊影响因子、还原本身内涵,指导作者投稿选刊、甄别伪劣杂志,以数据共享促试验诚信、最大化试验效益,突出人文关怀、强调社会责任,增列科研不端行为、明确作者与编者责任这5个方面对《ICMJE推荐规范》近5年来做的主要修订工作进行梳理和分析,从而为我国医学期刊提供借鉴和指导。 相似文献
14.
Clarinda CEREJO 《Learned Publishing》2014,27(1):63-75
Countries in East Asia – specifically China, Japan, and South Korea – are rapidly emerging as major contributors to global research output. However, owing to barriers in language and culture, it is possible that authors from these countries face unique challenges in getting published. Moreover, as submissions from these countries increase, journal editors may be able to spot some trends in the problems encountered when processing these submissions. This study presents the results of two surveys – one involving non‐native English‐speaking authors from East Asia and another involving international journal editors. The surveys were designed to throw light on the challenges East Asian authors face in the publication process and the perceptions journal editors have of submissions from East Asian countries. Here, we present and discuss the survey results, highlight gaps in the perspectives of authors and journal editors, and make recommendations to bridge these gaps. 相似文献
15.
Frank‐Thorsten KRELL 《Learned Publishing》2010,23(1):59-62
The journal impact factor is widely used as a performance indicator for single authors (despite its unsuitably in this respect). Hence, authors are increasingly exercised if there is any sign that impact factors are being manipulated. Editors who ask authors to cite relevant papers from their own journal are accused of acting unethically. This is surprising because, besides publishers, authors are the primary beneficiaries of an increased impact factor of the journal in which they publish, and because the citation process is biased anyway. There is growing evidence that quality and relevance are not always the reasons for choosing references. Authors' biases and personal environments as well as strategic considerations are major factors. As long as an editor does not force authors to cite irrelevant papers from their own journal, I consider it as a matter of caretaking for the journal and its authors if an editor brings recent papers to the authors' attention. It would be unfair to authors and disloyal to the publisher if an editor did not try to increase the impact of his/her own journal. 相似文献
16.
期刊编辑与作者间产生信息不对称是客观存在的,它会给期刊编辑工作带来很多负面影响。要消除这些影响,一要不断提高期刊编辑的信息意识,二要不断提高期刊编辑的综合信息素养,增强信息能力,三要建立期刊编辑与作者间的有效信息传递机制。 相似文献
17.
Do academic journals favor authors who share their institutional affiliation? To answer this question we examine citation counts, as a proxy for paper quality, for articles published in four leading international relations journals during the years 2000–2015. We compare citation counts for articles written by “in-group members” (authors affiliated with the journal’s publishing institution) versus “out-group members” (authors not affiliated with that institution). Articles written by in-group authors received 18% to 49% fewer Web of Science citations when published in their home journal (International Security or World Politics) vs. an unaffiliated journal, compared to out-group authors. These results are mainly driven by authors who received their PhDs from Harvard or MIT. The findings show evidence of a bias within some journals towards publishing papers by faculty from their home institution, at the expense of paper quality. 相似文献
18.
《Library & information science research》2014,36(3-4):192-202
In an increasingly digital environment, many factors influence how academic researchers decide what to read, what to cite, where to publish their work, and how they assign trust when making these decisions. This study focuses on how this differs according to the geographical location of the researcher, specifically in terms of the country's level of development. Data were collected by a questionnaire survey of 3650 authors who had published articles in international journals. The human development index (HDI) was used to compare authors' scholarly behavior. The findings show that researchers from less developed countries such as India and China (medium HDI) compared to those in developed countries, such as the USA and UK (very high HDI) are more reliant on external factors and those criteria that are related to authority, brand and reputation, such as authors' names, affiliation, country and journal name. Even when deciding where to publish, the publisher of the journal is more important for developing countries than it is for researchers from the US and UK. Scholars from high HDI countries also differ in these aspects: a) they are less discriminatory than authors from developing countries in their citation practices; b) for them the fact that a source is peer reviewed is the most important factor when deciding where to publish; c) they are more negative towards the use of repositories and social media for publishing and more skeptical about their potential for increasing usage or reaching a wider audience. 相似文献
19.
目前,国内期刊社关于论文作者稿酬的支付没有统一的标准,有的期刊社不支付稿酬,有的期刊社稿酬支付仍然沿用1999年发布的《出版文字作品报酬规定》,还有些期刊社采取优稿优酬制度,导致作者意见较多。为了更加公平合理地给期刊论文作者支付稿酬,建议国内期刊社可采用基本稿酬+被引频次支付部分稿酬的办法,并就其依据、实施方法、统计被引频次时间范围、不同期刊引用区别对待及其应用的可行性进行分析总结。 相似文献
20.
Jonathan J. Mallett 《Learned Publishing》2021,34(1):49-56
- Scientific publication has been a key part of the scientific method since the inception of Philosophical Transactions in 1665.
- The scientific publications industry has grown exponentially along with science, incorporating technological innovations along the way, and adapting journal processes and practices to changing needs of science as it matured.
- Of all the technological innovations over more than 300 years, the move to online journals may be the most significant, making open access to content practical for the first time.
- The open‐access movement is disrupting the economics of journal publishing, which is hoped will make the industry more competitive: the ability of the publications industry to adapt to open access will be a measure of its resilience.
- The demand for articles published in reputable journals continues to grow as readers trust the credibility of peer reviewed journal articles, and good authors value the prestige of publishing in the best journals.
- It is difficult to predict what new functionalities may be included in articles of the future or what additional services publishers and editors will provide, but there is every reason to believe that scientific journal articles are here to stay.