【摘要】： 審稿人是指從事稿件審讀、評價、建議取舍,并對需要修改稿件提出修改的要求和建議的人員,其審稿意見是科技期刊主編和編輯錄用稿件的重要參考依據(jù),也是決定科技期刊學(xué)術(shù)質(zhì)量的重要因素之一。審稿人的審稿質(zhì)量是保證出版物學(xué)術(shù)質(zhì)量的基礎(chǔ)。在審稿過程中,審稿人由于受到各種不利因素的影響,使得審稿意見的撰寫偏離了客觀、公正、貼切的原則,為主編和編輯提供了不恰當(dāng)?shù)膶徃逡庖?從而誤導(dǎo)了主編和編輯的正確決策。因此,怎樣避免這些不利因素對審稿人審稿質(zhì)量的影響,更好地為主編和編輯提供高質(zhì)量的審稿意見,使得優(yōu)秀稿件脫穎而出,是國內(nèi)外科技期刊主編和編輯共同關(guān)心的熱點問題。 本研究綜述了近年來有關(guān)影響科技期刊審稿人審稿質(zhì)量的因素,通過文獻綜述法和專家咨詢法將影響科技期刊審稿人審稿質(zhì)量的因素歸納為審稿人的素質(zhì)、審稿人的審稿心理、制度性因素(審稿單等)、審稿方式、稿件人情因素、審稿人的年齡、審稿人的健康狀況、審稿費的多少、利益沖突、稿件本身質(zhì)量、編輯部所送稿件與審稿人專業(yè)接近程度等11個影響因素。本研究采用自行設(shè)計的經(jīng)專家論證的調(diào)查表,對部分科技期刊的審稿人進行了匿名式問卷調(diào)查,調(diào)查分析影響科技期刊審稿人審稿質(zhì)量的主要因素及各因素對審稿人審稿質(zhì)量的影響程度,探討如何切實避免這些因素的措施,以數(shù)理方法篩選出影響審稿人審稿質(zhì)量的主要因素,通過直線相關(guān)分析了解變量間的因果關(guān)系,通過回歸分析進一步弄清楚各因素對審稿人審稿質(zhì)量的影響程度,以期為科技期刊編輯部將更多的人力、物力、財力集中在對影響科技期刊審稿人審稿質(zhì)量有重要影響的因素上,降低對影響較小的因素的關(guān)注,達到資源優(yōu)化的目的。 為了切實避免各因素對科技期刊審稿人審稿質(zhì)量的影響,本研究對調(diào)查結(jié)果進行了詳盡分析,根據(jù)本研究結(jié)果提出了九大應(yīng)對措施:⑴建立審稿質(zhì)量評價機制,加強審稿人素質(zhì)培訓(xùn);⑵堅持稿件評審標(biāo)準(zhǔn),規(guī)范審稿制度;⑶加強審稿人個人自身素養(yǎng),提高自我心理調(diào)控能力;⑷科學(xué)合理的選擇審稿方式;⑸加大制度性因素研究,不斷修訂和完善各種制度性因素;⑹動態(tài)地掌握審稿人的年齡和健康狀況;⑺堅持稿件評審回避原則,加大審稿經(jīng)費投入;⑻充分利用現(xiàn)代科技手段,加強稿件初審;⑼多途徑了解審稿人專業(yè),健全審稿人數(shù)據(jù)庫。通過上述措施的提出,力求為科技期刊獲得更多、更好的審稿意見,最終達到提高科技期刊整體學(xué)術(shù)質(zhì)量的目的。
[Abstract]:A manuscript reviewer refers to a person who is engaged in reviewing, evaluating, recommending or accepting manuscripts and putting forward requests and suggestions for revision of manuscripts, the opinions of which are the important reference basis for editors and editors of sci-tech periodicals to accept manuscripts. It is also one of the important factors that determine the academic quality of sci-tech periodicals. The quality of manuscript reviewers is the basis to guarantee the academic quality of publications. In the process of reviewing manuscripts, due to the influence of various unfavorable factors, the reviewers' opinions deviate from the principles of objectivity, impartiality and relevance, and provide improper opinions for editors and editors. Thus mislead the editor and editor of the correct decision. Therefore, how to avoid the impact of these unfavorable factors on the quality of the reviewers, and how to better provide high-quality opinions for editors and editors, so that outstanding manuscripts stand out. It is a hot issue of common concern for editors and editors of science and technology periodicals at home and abroad. This study summarizes the factors that affect the quality of manuscripts reviewers of sci-tech periodicals in recent years. Through the methods of literature review and expert consultation, the factors affecting the quality of reviewers of sci-tech periodicals are summed up as the qualities of reviewers, and the reviewers' psychology of reviewing manuscripts. Institutional factors (review orders, etc.), ways of reviewing manuscripts, human factors of manuscripts, age of reviewers, health status of reviewers, amount of fees for reviewing manuscripts, conflicts of interest, quality of manuscripts themselves, Editorial department contribution and reviewer professional proximity to 11 factors. In this study, an anonymous questionnaire survey was conducted among the reviewers of some scientific and technological journals with a self-designed questionnaire, which was verified by experts. This paper investigates and analyzes the main factors that affect the quality of manuscripts reviewers of sci-tech periodicals and the degree to which each factor affects the quality of reviewers of manuscripts, and probes into the measures to avoid these factors in practice. The main factors affecting the reviewer's manuscript quality are screened by mathematical method, and the causality among variables is understood by linear correlation analysis, and the degree of influence of each factor on the reviewer's manuscript quality is further clarified by regression analysis. It is expected that more manpower, material resources and financial resources will be concentrated on the factors that have an important influence on the quality of the reviewers' manuscripts for the editorial department of sci-tech periodicals, so as to reduce the attention to the less influential factors and to achieve the purpose of optimizing the resources. In order to avoid the influence of various factors on the quality of manuscripts reviewers of sci-tech periodicals, this study makes a detailed analysis of the results of the investigation, and puts forward nine measures to evaluate the quality of manuscripts: 1, according to the results of this study. Strengthen the quality training of reviewers and insist on the evaluation standard of manuscripts, standardize the system of reviewing manuscripts, strengthen the self-accomplishment of individual reviewers, improve the ability of self-psychological control and improve the ability of scientific and reasonable selection and review of manuscripts, and increase the research on institutional factors. Constantly revise and perfect all kinds of institutional factors 6 dynamically grasp the age and health of the reviewers and adhere to the principle of review and avoidance of manuscripts, increase the input of funds for the review of manuscripts and make full use of modern scientific and technological means to strengthen the preliminary examination of manuscripts; Many ways to understand the professional reviewers, improve the manuscript reviewer database. Through the above measures, we try our best to obtain more and better opinions for scientific and technological journals, and finally achieve the goal of improving the overall academic quality of sci-tech periodicals.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：第三軍醫(yī)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號】：G237.5

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條

1 梁麗;張洋;;專家審稿存在的問題分析及解決措施[J];中國科技信息;2009年12期

2 陳進壽;從人際關(guān)系談同行評議制的改進[J];中國科學(xué)基金;2002年03期

3 欒奕;王曉陽;吳欣欣;王穎;;醫(yī)學(xué)期刊“人情稿件”及處理[J];中國煤炭工業(yè)醫(yī)學(xué)雜志;2008年11期

，

本文編號：2161336