共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 46 毫秒
1.
2.
3.
同行评审意见是期刊编辑用稿决策的重要依据,同行评审专家的来源和遴选与评审结果的质量和公平性密切相关。编辑为稿件遴选出评审意愿、专业、能力匹配,且时间充裕的审稿专家是比较费时、费力的。本文基于投稿论文的参考文献和引用的内容、动机及情感分析,提出一种同行评审专家的遴选方法。该方法有助于“小同行”专家的发现,降低不同学术范式导致的同行评议误判率,为编辑的稿件送审工作提供参考。 相似文献
4.
- Peer review is used to evaluate research, including publications, scientific awards, and grant proposals, and there is a continuum of at least six approaches to review from completely closed, double‐blind review to fully‐open and citable peer review.
- It is getting harder to find suitable experts to serve as reviewers so publishers and others are experimenting with methods to incentivize researcher participation, with a growing interest in enabling citation of peer‐review activity as a component.
- A Working Group on Peer Review Service, facilitated by CASRAI, was created to develop a data model and citation standard for peer‐review activity that can be used to support both existing and new review models.
- Standardized citation structures for reviews can enable the inclusion of peer‐review activity in personal recognition and evaluation, as well the ability to refer to reviews as part of the scholarly literature.
5.
6.
对现行审稿模式的思考与建议 总被引：22，自引：8，他引：14
针对我国现行的封闭式审稿模式的缺陷与不足，借鉴国外期刊的审稿模式，提出改进、完善审稿制度的方法。用连续审稿方式取代平行审稿方式，审稿内容首先在审稿人之间公开，在征得审稿人同意的情况下，审稿人姓名与审稿内容向作者公开。在此基础上逐步实行网上公开式审稿制度。 相似文献
7.
《Journal of Informetrics》2022,16(2):101264
Peer review plays an essential role in the scholarly publishing life cycle. Using the verified peer review records of reviewers who use the Publons, we employed review length as a potential indicator of the effort researchers spend on peer review. We then examined the associations between various factors and review length. Special focus was placed on estimating the relationships between non-academic (economic and sociological aspects) factors and review length. Our results show that gender, country-level cultural backgrounds, and country-level economic backgrounds were significantly associated with review length. In addition, there are significant associations of disciplines (humanities & social sciences or hard sciences), English proficiency, publications, and verified reviews with review length. 相似文献
8.
A global survey conducted by arXiv in 2016 showed that 58% of arXiv users thought arXiv should have a peer review system. The current opinion is that arXiv should adopt the Community Peer Review model. This paper evaluates and identifies two weak points of Community Peer Review and proposes a new peer review model – Self‐Organizing Peer Review. We propose a model in which automated methods of matching reviewers to articles and ranking both users and articles can be implemented. In addition, we suggest a strategic plan to increase recognition of articles in preprint databases within academic circles so that second generation preprint databases can achieve faster and cheaper publication. 相似文献
9.
国际上同行评议典型做法及对我国的启示 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
同行评议一直是最权威、最有效的科学评价方式,美国、日本、欧盟等发达国家和国际组织都建立较为完整的同行评议制度,制定同行评议政策法规,建立标准化的评议流程,针对不同类型的项目采取不同评议方法。面对科技创新高质量发展的新要求、新任务,本文从加强相关法规体系建设、建立规范化的同行评议准则、构建完善的同行评议专家库、探索因项制宜的同行评议方式、大力营造良好的同行评议生态环境等方面对规范和完善我国同行评议制度提出对策建议。 相似文献
10.
学术论文同行评审:过去·现状·未来 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
研究同行评审制度有助于审视学术交流与出版过程,以检验对学术成果的审查和管理工作的合理性,包括评审结果的正确性和评审方法的公平性,并进而为同行评审制度的发展和完善提供参考依据.文章简要介绍同行评审的发展历程,阐述并探讨学术论文同行评审的作用以及存在和面临的问题,并分析同行评审的发展趋势. 相似文献
11.
关于制订"科技期刊专家审稿规则"的建议 总被引：4，自引：0，他引：4
专家审稿是保证科技期刊审稿质量的关键环节.目前尚无权威部门制定的专家审稿规范或规则.为使专家审稿进一步规范化,提高专家审稿质量,有必要研究、制订统一的专家审稿规则. 相似文献
12.
Jonathan D. Eldredge Holly E. Phillips Philip J. Kroth 《Medical reference services quarterly》2013,32(4):412-423
Many health sciences librarians as well as other professionals attend conferences on a regular basis. This study sought to link an innovative peer review process of presented research papers to long-term conference outcomes in the peer-reviewed professional journal literature. An evidence-based conference included a proof-of-concept study to gauge the long-term outcomes from research papers presented during the program. Real-time peer review recommendations from the conference were linked to final versions of articles published in the peer-reviewed literature. The real-time peer review feedback served as the basis for further mentoring to guide prospective authors toward publishing their research results. These efforts resulted in the publication of two of the four research papers in the peer-viewed literature. A third presented paper appeared in a blog because the authors wanted to disseminate their findings more quickly than through the journal literature. The presenters of the fourth paper never published their study. Real-time peer review from this study can be adapted to other professional conferences that include presented research papers. 相似文献
13.
14.
15.
分析了网络同行评议的优点,并对国外现有的几种网络同行评议软件进行了对比分析,根据国内网络同行评议开展的现状,认为国内应加强对网络同行评议软件及系统的开发与建设,从而推进网络同行评议工作的开展。 相似文献
16.
审稿是期刊筛选论文、确保刊发论文质量的重要手段,审稿过程可能会受到审稿人、编辑和作者有意或无意的偏倚的影响而导致审稿结果失实。本文总结了医学论文常见审稿偏倚,如内容偏倚、保守偏倚、利益冲突、作者身份或地域偏倚等问题,对目前国内外期刊现有的审稿模式进行讨论并提出建议。各期刊可结合自身实际情况,采取一种或多种审稿模式;谨慎选择审稿人,既要“对口”送审,又要避免利益冲突;避免审稿一票否决,严格落实三审制度;尊重作者的科研成果,建立作者申诉机制。基于此,确保论文的优势得到承认,弱点得到剖析,为作者提供具有建设性的修改意见,帮助作者提高科学研究及论文撰写的水平,最大限度地减少审稿过程中出现偏倚。 相似文献
17.
同行审稿是保障期刊学术质量的重要环节,但同行专家审稿积极性不高、拒绝审稿、勉强审稿已成为普遍现象.如何提高审稿专家的积极性,是学术期刊亟待解决的共性问题.文章以《中国天然药物》编辑部近年来约请审稿人的实践心得为基础,讨论提高专家审稿积极性的措施:选择潜在作者群作为审稿专家,避免过量送审,加大初审退稿率,尊重审稿专家的要求,与无反馈的审稿专家取得联系,利用ORCID认可审稿专家的贡献等,旨在致力于提高专家的审稿同意率,从而在源头上推动期刊的发展. 相似文献
18.
同行专家审稿对保证学术期刊论文质量做出了重要贡献.为改进学术期刊对同行专家审稿致谢的表达方式,简述学术期刊对同行专家审稿致谢的常见做法,指出其存在的问题,进而提出改进的建议.归纳了论文作者对同行审稿专家公开具名致谢的内容和表达方式.认为学术期刊论文作者可以适当方式对审稿专家提出的审稿意见和建议公开具名致谢. 相似文献
19.
建立科技期刊开放式审稿系统 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
分析了科技期刊现有审稿系统的缺陷后认为,在科技信息传播工具和传播方式发生了变化的情况下,利用因特网在原有的审稿系统中增加反馈机制、建立开放的审稿系统,一方面可以制约审稿人的审稿行为,另一方面可以提高审稿人的审稿能力,从而达到科技科期刊与审稿人双赢的目的. 相似文献
20.
在系统梳理“以刊评文”的由来和成因的基础上,提出了“以刊评文”的危害,包括:1)以SCI为导向,损伤科研生态;2)优秀科技论文外流,知识产权割让;3)科研方向跟从,应用价值不高;4)期刊竞争不平等,有碍国内科技期刊发展。阐释了以建立健全同行评议为核心的应对策略:1)建立小同行专家库,实行分类分领域评价;2)优化同行评议生态,提升专家评审素质和环境;3)建立国家开放知识库和预印本平台,推进开放评审与开放获取相结合的公开机制;4)建立有国际影响力的论文引文索引数据库,完善自身评价手段和工具。 相似文献