| 学术期刊审稿人公开的利弊分析:以地球科学类期刊为例 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 史冠中,姚戈,王淑华,李根.学术期刊审稿人公开的利弊分析:以地球科学类期刊为例[J].编辑学报,2016,28(6):547-549. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 史冠中 姚戈 王淑华 李根 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 中国地质大学(武汉)《地球科学》编辑部,430074,武汉;中国地质大学(武汉)《地球科学》编辑部,430074,武汉;中国地质大学(武汉)《地球科学》编辑部,430074,武汉;中国地质大学(武汉)《地球科学》编辑部,430074,武汉 |
| |
| 基金项目： | 中央高校基本科研业务专项资金资助(No.2014289029)，中国高校科技期刊研究会专项课题资助项目(CUJS2015-018) |
| |
| 摘 要： | 目前有些地球科学类国际期刊在文章致谢段中公布审稿人姓名,或者直接将审稿意见以报告形式刊出.分析表明:公布审稿人可为研究人员把握科研动向、跟踪研究进展提供帮助,具有科学研究风向标的作用;同时,公开审稿人可以使其规范自己的行为,审稿公开透明,起到监督作用,读者也可以通过审稿人甄别问题稿件,对文章进行选择引用.但是,多数审稿人对公开姓名持有保留态度,只有少数领域内的杰出的学者支持公开审稿人身份.本文作者认为:在获得审稿人同意的前提下,可以考虑公开杰出学者审稿人和绿色通道录用稿件的审稿人.由此可以获得读者认可,促进文章引用.
|
| 关 键 词： | 公开审稿 利弊分析 地球科学期刊 |
| 收稿时间： | 2014/5/12 0:00:00 |
| 修稿时间： | 2014/5/12 0:00:00 |
Pros and cons by disclosing peer reviewers' identity:a case study in geoscience journals |
| |
| SHI Guanzhong,YAO Ge,WANG Shuhua and LI Gen.Pros and cons by disclosing peer reviewers'' identity:a case study in geoscience journals[J].Acta Editologica,2016,28(6):547-549. |
| |
| Authors: | SHI Guanzhong YAO Ge WANG Shuhua and LI Gen |
| |
| Institution: | Editorial office of Journal of Earth Science, China University of Geosciences in Wuhan, 430074, Wuhan, China,Editorial office of Journal of Earth Science, China University of Geosciences in Wuhan, 430074, Wuhan, China,Editorial office of Journal of Earth Science, China University of Geosciences in Wuhan, 430074, Wuhan, China and Editorial office of Journal of Earth Science, China University of Geosciences in Wuhan, 430074, Wuhan, China |
| |
| Abstract: | Currently some international journals of earth sciences has the phenomenon of making public the peer reviewers'' identity at the end of articles, or directly attaching the reviewers'' comments. Our analysis shows that researchers can follow scientific frontiers, and track the research trend with the help of disclosed reviewers. Moreover, the action of uncovering reviewers is able to help regulate the reviewers'' behavior, and better serve as a role of supervisor. Open review can help readers to identify articles with ethical problem and decide whether to cite them or not. However, our investigation reveals that most juvenile reviewers are unwilling to disclose their identity, and only a small number of distinguished experts and scholars support uncovering reviewers'' identity. Therefore, we favor that when the reviewers agree, journals of earth sciences should consider disclosing reviewers in public, in the case that reviewers are famous experts and articles are accepted by specific way. |
| |
| Keywords: | open peer review pros and cons analysis journals of earth sciences |
| 本文献已被 万方数据 等数据库收录！ |
| 点击此处可从《编辑学报》浏览原始摘要信息 |
| 点击此处可从《编辑学报》下载免费的PDF全文 |
|
