科研人员视角的学术期刊影响力因素分析及其对期刊发展的启示
|
摘要
【目的】探讨医学科研人员评价期刊影响力的要素及重要程度。【方法】选取中华医学会信息管理平台中在《中华神经医学杂志》发表论文的作者及其同行(包括医学高校科研工作者、医院临床医生共226名),采用网络问卷(问卷星)的形式进行调查,调查内容包括调查对象的基本信息、对期刊评价的认知程度和途径、对26个期刊影响力评价指标(18个客观指标、8个主观指标)重要性的评分。【结果】医药学科专家认可度是所有指标中重要性评分最高的指标;主观指标中重要性从高到低依次为学术影响力、出版行业影响力,社会影响力;客观指标中影响因子是重要性评分最高的指标,重要性从高到低依次为被引、被收录、被下载、稿源特征和时效性指标。省级及以上基金论文比是稿源特征指标中重要性评分最高的指标。【结论】期刊发展应以定量数据为依据,以学术质量为根本。只有提高期刊的曝光率和正面宣传频率,出版重大课题研究成果专题,更好地满足科研人员的信息需求,才能使科技期刊成为科研人员最关注的学术交流平台。
[Purposes]This paper aims to explore the factors with which medical researchers evaluate the influence of journals and their importance degree. [Methods]We selected authors of Chinese Journal of Neuromedicine from the information management platform of Chinese Medical Association and their colleagues( including a total of 226 scientific researchers in medical universities and doctors in hospitals),and performed an investigation using the online questionnaire( Questionnaire Star),which included the basic information of the respondents,the degree and way of cognition about journal evaluation,and the importance scores of the 26 evaluation indexes( 18 objective indexes and 8 subjective indexes) of journal influence. [Findings]Expert's recognition is the most important index among all the indicators. The academic influence is the most important index among the subjective indexes,followed by the influence in publishing industry,and social influence. Impact factor is the most important index among the objective indicators. The order of importance is indicator of citation,being included by database,being downloaded,manuscript feature,and timeliness. The paper ratio with provincial-level and the above fund is the most important index among the indicators of manuscript feature. [Conclusions] The development of medical journals should be based on quantitative data,focus on academic quality,improve exposure and positive propagation,and publish the major project results to meet the information needs of researchers. Then journals will become the academic platform most concerned by researchers.
[Purposes]This paper aims to explore the factors with which medical researchers evaluate the influence of journals and their importance degree. [Methods]We selected authors of Chinese Journal of Neuromedicine from the information management platform of Chinese Medical Association and their colleagues( including a total of 226 scientific researchers in medical universities and doctors in hospitals),and performed an investigation using the online questionnaire( Questionnaire Star),which included the basic information of the respondents,the degree and way of cognition about journal evaluation,and the importance scores of the 26 evaluation indexes( 18 objective indexes and 8 subjective indexes) of journal influence. [Findings]Expert's recognition is the most important index among all the indicators. The academic influence is the most important index among the subjective indexes,followed by the influence in publishing industry,and social influence. Impact factor is the most important index among the objective indicators. The order of importance is indicator of citation,being included by database,being downloaded,manuscript feature,and timeliness. The paper ratio with provincial-level and the above fund is the most important index among the indicators of manuscript feature. [Conclusions] The development of medical journals should be based on quantitative data,focus on academic quality,improve exposure and positive propagation,and publish the major project results to meet the information needs of researchers. Then journals will become the academic platform most concerned by researchers.
引文
[1]张志强.从核心期刊评价之争看我国学术期刊评价体系建设[J].河南大学学报(社会科学版),2018,58(5):144-150.
[2]朱剑.量化指标:学术期刊不能承受之轻——评《全国报纸期刊出版质量综合评估指标体系(试行)》[J].清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2013,28(1):30-47.
[3]臧莉娟.学术期刊评价主体的越位、缺失与回归[J].评价与管理,2014(4):17-19,23.
[4]沈固朝.期刊评价、学术评价与引文索引[J].华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2014,53(6):200-201.
[5]朱剑.摒弃排行榜:走向科学评价的第一步[J].编辑之友,2016(5):5-8,14.
[6]李湘萍.基于学术共同体的科技评价体系设计[J].中国高校科技,2018(10):67-68.
[7]耿海英,苏金燕.我国科研人员对期刊评价认识的调查分析[J].图书与情报,2016(2):107-112.
[8] Callaway E. Beat it,impact factor! Publishing elite turns against controversial metric[J]. Nature,2016,535(7611):210-211.
[9]顾欢.“标准特征因子”“标准论文影响分值”与SNIP在跨学科评价中的相关性分析[J].情报杂志,2017,36(8):120-123.
[10]李西民.关于核心期刊的定义及对完善核心期刊评价的建议[J].河南科学,2009,27(12):1617-1620.
[11]刘睿远,刘雪立,王璞,等.基金论文比作为科技期刊评价指标的合理性——基于SCI数据库中眼科学期刊的实证研究[J].中国科技期刊研究,2013,24(3):472-476.
[12]王燕.基于出版参数与文献计量学统计的医学核心期刊编辑出版策划[J].编辑学报,2018,30(2):164-167.
[2]朱剑.量化指标:学术期刊不能承受之轻——评《全国报纸期刊出版质量综合评估指标体系(试行)》[J].清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2013,28(1):30-47.
[3]臧莉娟.学术期刊评价主体的越位、缺失与回归[J].评价与管理,2014(4):17-19,23.
[4]沈固朝.期刊评价、学术评价与引文索引[J].华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2014,53(6):200-201.
[5]朱剑.摒弃排行榜:走向科学评价的第一步[J].编辑之友,2016(5):5-8,14.
[6]李湘萍.基于学术共同体的科技评价体系设计[J].中国高校科技,2018(10):67-68.
[7]耿海英,苏金燕.我国科研人员对期刊评价认识的调查分析[J].图书与情报,2016(2):107-112.
[8] Callaway E. Beat it,impact factor! Publishing elite turns against controversial metric[J]. Nature,2016,535(7611):210-211.
[9]顾欢.“标准特征因子”“标准论文影响分值”与SNIP在跨学科评价中的相关性分析[J].情报杂志,2017,36(8):120-123.
[10]李西民.关于核心期刊的定义及对完善核心期刊评价的建议[J].河南科学,2009,27(12):1617-1620.
[11]刘睿远,刘雪立,王璞,等.基金论文比作为科技期刊评价指标的合理性——基于SCI数据库中眼科学期刊的实证研究[J].中国科技期刊研究,2013,24(3):472-476.
[12]王燕.基于出版参数与文献计量学统计的医学核心期刊编辑出版策划[J].编辑学报,2018,30(2):164-167.