| 人文社会科学期刊评价中同行评议与影响因子相关性分析 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 苏金燕.人文社会科学期刊评价中同行评议与影响因子相关性分析[J].图书情报知识,2020(3):128-136,F0003. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 苏金燕 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 中国社会科学评价研究院 |
| |
| 基金项目： | 国家社会科学基金重大委托项目“社科研究领域哲学社会科学成果评价体系与奖励制度研究”(2016MZD003)的研究成果之一。 |
| |
| 摘 要： | 目的/意义]针对同行评议与影响因子在期刊评价中的争议,对两种期刊评价方法得出评价结果的关系进行分析,客观认识两种方法的相关性和差异性,以便更好地设计评价指标,开展评价工作。研究设计/方法]以人文社会科学33个学科共计1,291种期刊为统计样本,采用调查问卷形式由专家对这些期刊进行同行评议,然后对同行评议与期刊即年影响因子、影响因子和五年影响因子的相关性做比较分析,并对学科、期刊载文量、创刊时间长短等因素对两者相关性影响进行分析。结论/发现]同行评议和影响因子两种方法对期刊进行评价时,两者得到的评价结果具有较高的一致性,社会科学领域的一致性高于人文科学领域;同行评议结果与即年影响因子、影响因子和五年影响因子的一致性依次递增;同行评议专家更愿意给载文量少的期刊打高分,但载文量和期刊影响因子之间的相关性不大。创新/价值]使用4,500多份专家调查问卷,以定量统计分析的方法对同行评议与期刊影响因子两者在期刊评价中评价结果的一致性进行研究。
|
| 关 键 词： | 期刊评价 同行评议 影响因子 人文社会科学 定性评价 定量评价 |
Correlation Analysis on Peer Review and Impact Factor of Journal Evaluation in Humanities and Social Science |
| |
| SU Jinyan.Correlation Analysis on Peer Review and Impact Factor of Journal Evaluation in Humanities and Social Science[J].Document,Information & Knowledge,2020(3):128-136,F0003. |
| |
| Authors: | SU Jinyan |
| |
| Abstract: | Purpose/Significance]Since there are controversies between peer review and impact factor in journal evaluation,this paper intends to analyze the correlation of evaluation results of the two methods.It aims to identify the correlation and difference between the two methods so as to develop evaluation indicators and conduct journal evaluation in a better way.Design/Methodology]1,291 journals in the field of humanities and social science were selected as the sample,and they were categorized into 33 disciplines.Experts performed peer reviews on these journals through questionnaires.Then comparison was made between peer review results and journal impact factors,including the current year impact factor,comprehensive impact factor and the recent five-year impact factor.Besides,the influence of disciplines,paper amounts,launching time and other related factors on the correlation of the two methods was explored.Findings/Conclusion]High consistency has been found in the evaluation results of the two methods.And the consistency is higher in social science than in humanities.The consistency of results between peer review and impact factor increases successively in the current year impact factor,impact factor and recent five-year impact factor.At the same time,peer reviewers tend to give high scores to journals of small paper amount while there is no obvious correlation between paper amount and impact factor.Originality/Value]A quantitative statistical analysis has been conducted on the consistency of journal evaluation results between peer review and impact factor with the use of over 4,500 questionnaires. |
| |
| Keywords: | Journal evaluation Peer review Impact factor Humanities and social science Qualitative assessment Quantitative assessment |
| 本文献已被 维普 等数据库收录！ |
|
