论文部分内容阅读
本文运用统计数据、实际工作经验和前人的研究成果,对同人评审体制的目标、评审人的赞同及偏见、评审过程和目的、评审过程的价值,以及编辑、作者和审稿人在这一体制中的关系等进行研究。本文将期刊的同人评审体制定义为:”由专家(同人)对提交科技期刊发表的材料作出评价。“文中概括了同人评审功能的四种形象比拟,即筛子、转换器、锤子(同人评审)和铁砧(编辑标准)、处在黑暗中的射击手。本文认为有关期刊同人评审的大部分研究在方法论方面是较弱的,并且大部分集中过程的研究,而不是对结果的研究。本文预测将开发一种用于期刊同人评审过程的研究程序,并且会在10至20年间对于大部分关键性问题取得进展,而这种程序对发展整个科学社会的一种相互信任和支持的关系,将是必要的。本文还认为期刊同人评审体制是一种重要的研究客体,呼吁加强这方面的研究,并将其列入某种研究的议事日程。
This article uses statistics, practical work experience and predecessors’ research results to analyze the goal of peer review system, the approval and prejudice of reviewers, the review process and purpose, the value of review process, and the contributions of editors, authors and reviewers in this The relationship between the system and other research. This paper defines a peer review system for journals as: “An expert (peer) evaluates the material published for the submission of a scientific journals.” The article outlines four competing features of peer review: sieves, transducers, hammers (peer reviews) And anvil (editorial standard), shooter in the darkness. This paper argues that most of the research on peer review of journals is weak in methodology and most of the studies focus on the process, not on the results. This paper predicts that a research program will be developed for the peer review process and will progress on most of the key issues within 10 to 20 years, a relationship that is trustworthy and supportive for the development of the entire scientific community , Will be necessary. This article also believes that peer review system is an important research object, calling for strengthening the research in this area and putting it into the agenda of some kind of research.