| 开放审稿的必要性及可行性探讨 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 汪挺,阮星星,陈小宇,王静.开放审稿的必要性及可行性探讨[J].编辑学报,2014,26(1):19-21. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 汪挺 阮星星 陈小宇 王静 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 《中华胃肠外科杂志》编辑部;《中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志》(电子版)编辑部; |
| |
| 摘 要： | 开放审稿本质上是作者与审稿人身份公开。目前对于开放审稿的确切定义和实施方式学界尚未达成共识。开放审稿最大的优势就是为学术交流提供了一个新的平台,并有助于增强审稿人责任感和维护学术公正。技术仅是开放审稿的一种手段,不应成为其制约因素。开放审稿面临的最大挑战是能否被学术界认可与接受。
|
| 关 键 词： | 同行评议 开放审稿 学术出版 学术交流 |
| 收稿时间： | 2013/7/28 0:00:00 |
| 修稿时间： | 2013/7/28 0:00:00 |
Necessity and feasibility of open peer review |
| |
| WANG Ting,RUAN Xingxing,CHEN Xiaoyu and WANG Jing.Necessity and feasibility of open peer review[J].Acta Editologica,2014,26(1):19-21. |
| |
| Authors: | WANG Ting RUAN Xingxing CHEN Xiaoyu and WANG Jing |
| |
| Institution: | Editorial Department of Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 510655, Guangzhou, China |
| |
| Abstract: | Open peer review is essentially the disclosure of the authors'' and reviewers'' identities. Among the existing models of open peer review, the openness characteristics are different. However, a consensus around an understanding of definitions and models of open review has not been developed yet among scholarly and publishing communities. The most important benefit of open peer review is to strengthen academic communication. What''s more, open peer review may help to build up reviewers'' accountability and achieve social justice. Technology is merely a means to conduct open peer review, and should not become a restrictive factor of open peer review. Open peer review first needs to be considered and accepted by scholarly communities. |
| |
| Keywords: | peer review open peer review scholarly publishing academic communication |
| 本文献已被 CNKI 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 |
|
