共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 171 毫秒
1.
科技期刊稿约的要素及应注意的问题 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
稿约作为科技期刊联系作者、读者的一个重要窗口,的确值得我们认真思考.一份完整、规范、具体的稿约是编辑和作者双方对自身的约定和对对方的约束.通过分析科技期刊稿约的目的和所包含的要素,深入探讨了稿约中应注意的几个问题. 相似文献
2.
稿约作为科技期刊联系作者、读者的一个重要窗口,的确值得我们认真思考.一份完整、规范、具体的稿约是编辑和作者双方对自身的约定和对对方的约束.通过分析科技期刊稿约的目的和所包含的要素,深入探讨了稿约中应注意的几个问题. 相似文献
3.
期刊的稿约无论是对作者还是编辑部都是双赢的。但目前一些期刊存在不刊登稿约、稿约内容陈旧、稿约内容过于简单等问题。期刊编辑部应予以重视,撰写和发布符合要求的稿约,并在固定页面、固定期次刊登稿约;稿约要与时俱进,符合当前技术条件要求;稿约内容要齐全。 相似文献
4.
重视期刊"稿约"增强编辑的法律意识 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
在很多期刊编辑的观念中,"稿约"无关紧要,笔者抽查了150份科技期刊,发现刊登"稿约"的很少,有的常年在封底刊登(如<编辑学报>),有的不定期刊登(如<中国科技期刊研究>),有的从创刊号起就没有刊登过;除了使用"稿约"外,"征稿启事"、"征稿简则"、"本刊启事"等名称比较常用,极少数则用"告作者"、"版权声明"、"参考文献著录格式"、"‘注释、'参考文献、作者简介’撰写格式"、等名称来替代;"稿约"的内容也极不完整,大多数只是介绍刊物栏目设置,及对论文的字数、格式、参考文献、文献著录规范要求等;"稿约"刊登的位置有的在封三,有的在封四,有的利用期刊中的补白位置见缝插针."稿约"具有帮助作者了解刊物的基本情况和具体要求、提高作者投稿的针对性和命中率的作用,但只有这种作用是不够的. 相似文献
5.
稿约是作者与期刊之间确定权利义务关系的重要法律依据,因而研究稿约内容对于双方当事人的利益平衡具有非常重要的意义。本文调查了100份CSSCI来源期刊稿约,结果显示:便捷型是目前期刊主流的投稿方式,期刊录用答复期限比法律规定的30天要长得多,47%期刊未反对一稿多投,53%期刊未规定是否支付稿酬,89%期刊未明确是否收取版面费,42%期刊未规范作品修改权,41%期刊未规定信息网络传播权,极少数期刊与作者签订著作权转让合同。这反映我国期刊稿约存在不少亟待完善之处。基于此,提出一些具有针对性的改进意见。 相似文献
6.
稿约,顾名思义是报刊编者与作者间就投稿事宜达成的约定。是编者为保证来稿的基本质量事先提出的对来稿要求的通则。作者一经投稿,即视为同意该刊稿约并愿意执行其规定。因此,稿约是编者联系作者的一种重要手段。 虽然未见有权威机构对科技期刊的稿约作出明确的规定,但事实上科技期刊的稿约早已有其约定俗成的内容、形式和发布方式。随着 相似文献
7.
稿约规范的实质在于提高期刊的诚信度.通过阐述稿约规范的必要性,稿约内容的完整性、合法性以及稿约履约的实在性,以期加深期刊人对稿约规范的认识程度.稿约规范能起到融洽编者与作者之间关系,培植期刊活力的重要作用. 相似文献
8.
科技期刊稿约中保密条款的设置 总被引：1，自引：1，他引：0
阐述科技期刊稿约中设置保密条款的现实意义;通过对广东省科技期刊稿约中保密条款设置情况的调查分析,发现科技编辑普遍对保密工作的重视不够.认为科技编辑应在稿约中按照相关保密法令、法规界定国家秘密及保密范围,强化作者的保密意识,并明确保密措施及方式. 相似文献
9.
10.
分析科技期刊规范稿约的必要性,提出制定稿约应从完整性、规范性、合法性三方面来考虑,以方便作者参考借鉴和吸引优秀稿源。 相似文献
11.
稿件修改说明的必要性 总被引：1，自引：1，他引：0
退修信是作者与审稿专家进行学术交流的桥梁,是编辑与作者交流的重要方式,是作者修改稿件的依据.修改说明则是修改信息反馈的重要手段,是作者与编辑、作者与审稿专家沟通的纽带. 相似文献
12.
ѧ����������Ⱥ��ĸ���——һ��ͳ�Ʒ������� 总被引：3，自引：0，他引：3
对学科著者群落的概念、相关强度、学科著者群落中著者及其权数、单位文献著者量以及统计分析的应用前景等几个问题进行了初步的论述 相似文献
13.
14.
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
15.
16.
The paper analyzes best-seller lists in seven major European book markets between April 2008 and March 2009. The paper’s authors
introduce the concept of an impact factor for best-selling authors that shows how influential an author is in a given market
and across the analyzed markets overall. The paper’s authors discovered that a new generation of European best-selling authors
appeared in major book markets of Europe such that those not writing in English have an impact of almost twice that of the
English writers. Furthermore, the authors have discovered that only veteran English or American best-selling authors tend
to be published by big media conglomerates; the majority of the European best-selling authors were published by a surprising
mix of big and small, independent and international publishing houses. It is striking that English as the most popular second
language in the world did not play a stronger role as an intermediary language in the transmission of books from one European
culture to another, as European publishers in major markets still employ editors who read a variety of languages and thus
play the role of intermediaries in how books travel from one culture to another. 相似文献
17.
吸引优秀作者,办出精品期刊,力促期刊发展提升是办刊人永恒的追求.从《有色金属科学与工程》近年来的办刊实践发现:要快速提高科技学术期刊的质量,必须按照“投稿量、贡献率、忠诚度”界定好期刊的核心作者群,抓住影响期刊学术质量的“牛鼻子工程”,即核心作者群的发现、挖掘、吸纳、巩固、激励、利用,采取一切有利于发挥该群体作用的实招,增加期刊对该群体的黏性,努力使该群体的效能发挥到最大,使《有色金属科学与工程》在更名7年多的时间内,学术质量和社会声誉得到质的飞跃.认为编辑应在办刊中高度重视核心作者群的建设,牢固树立核心作者群是期刊发展提升的根基的观念. 相似文献
18.
19.
20.
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