【作者】 袁翀；

【导师】 叶继元；

【作者基本信息】 南京大学 ， 图书情报与档案管理， 2019， 博士

【摘要】 由我国期刊管理部门正式认定的人文社会科学学术期刊中有近半数为综合性学术期刊,这些期刊是人文学科与社会科学交叉融通的孕育之地,承载着推动我国人文社会科学繁荣发展的重要作用。不仅如此,人文社会科学综合性学术期刊的影响与所依托的学术机构、高等学校的优势学科息息相关,很大程度上支撑、促进本机构、本地区优势学科的繁荣发展。然而,这样一个体量庞大、学科覆盖性强的学术期刊群,近年来却陷入数量增长、整体声誉下降、千刊一面、低水平重复建设的困境,弱化了我国人文学科和社会科学领域内的研究特色。出现上述问题的一个主要原因是没有针对综合性人文社会科学学术期刊的合理评价体系。一直以来综合性人文社会科学学术期刊的评价存在发展思路不清晰、分类模糊、指标针对性不强的现象。因此,完善综合性人文社会科学学术期刊质量评价体系任务十分紧迫。迫切需要深入研究综合性人文社会科学学术期刊的内容特色,构建针对综合性学术期刊论文内容的分类体系,避免“胡子眉毛一把抓”,针对人文学科和社会科学研究领域的不同研究范式分类评价;迫切需要深入研究各类定性评价方法、利用各类定性评价结果,从不同角度反映综合性人文社会科学学术期刊的内容质量,避免“唯”量化的评价方法,构建针对综合性学术期刊的评价体系;迫切需要深入研究国内外先进的文献计量学定量评价成果,结合本土化数据源,扩大学术期刊影响力的覆盖程度,将学术著作对期刊的引用数据纳入期刊评价的体系。本研究首次将“包容性发展”理念引入学术期刊评价研究领域,从学术共同体的广泛参与,评价指标的全面渗透,评价过程的公正透明,评价结果促进各类期刊的特色化发展方面,阐述了“包容性发展”理念应用于学术期刊评价的可行性。在总体评价指标的设计思路上,既强调指标覆盖的全面性,又强调指标的渗透性、科学性、可逆性。结合综合性人文社会科学学术期刊特色,构建期刊质量评价体系。评价结果可为综合性人文社会科学学术期刊的发展,提供更具包容性、建设性的策略,为我国哲学社会科学的繁荣发展提供百家争鸣、百花齐放的园地。本研究利用学术“全评价”体系,结合文献计量学原理,采用专家访谈、问卷调查、文献调研、统计分析等方法,专门研究综合性人文社会科学学术期刊的质量评价问题,在尊重学术共同体意见的基础上,构建评价模型、科学地选择评价指标,确定客观权重。在形式评价层面,重视学术规范、制度保障、队伍建设、出版规范;在内容评价层面,充分利用各类学术共同体定性评价的结果,从论文阐述完整性、学科编辑定性评价视角、政府定性评奖视角,采集反映综合性人文社会科学学术期刊内容质量高低的内容评价结果;在效用评价层面,采用学术共同体集体参与的“引文评价”方法,通过不同时段的效用评价指标,对学术论文的当前、短期、长期效用,进行评价,并结合期刊发表论文对不同层次期刊的影响,用量化指标呈现各学科领域顶尖影响力结果,对论文的高层效用和顶尖效用进行评价。最后综合利用各类定性评价的结果,使用结构方程模型的方法,通过模型的拟合,使定性和定量以科学、融合的方式有机结合,得到评价结果。本研究利用127种综合性人文社会科学学术期刊进行验证,基于学术论文内容对综合性期刊进行分类研究,将这些期刊分为:综合性学术期刊(侧重人文学科)、综合性学术期刊(侧重社会科学)以及综合性社会科学期刊三类。按照包容性评价模型,分别收集形式评价指标数据、内容评价指标数据、和效用评价指标数据,获得127种综合性人文社会科学学术期刊的指标数据,验证包容性评价模型。并利用二次二阶聚类法对结果进行聚类,将评价结果分为一流期刊、优秀期刊和良好期刊三类,利用专家访谈,对评价结果进行验证。分析包容性评价结果与其他评价结果的异同,为综合性人文社会科学学术期刊的特色化发展提出对策性建议。评价结果表明,对综合性人文社会科学学术期刊质量进行包容性“全评价”,更具合理性和说服力,并得到一些同行专家的认可。本研究的贡献在于将“包容性发展”理念,引入期刊评价领域,丰富了人文社会科学学术期刊评价研究的理论。结合该理念使用学术“全评价”体系构建评价模型,充实了文献计量学量化指标库,广泛覆盖内容评价的定性指标,兼顾合理定量指标的评价指标体系,试图有效纠正当前“唯”量化的现状,建立以内容质量为主的评价体系。强化了分类评价的重要性,探索基于论文内容的综合性人文社会科学学术期刊分类体系,利用综合性人文社会科学学术期刊进行了验证性研究,为人文社会科学综合性学术期刊的发展提供新视角。本研究构建的学术期刊质量评价模型具有一般的指导意义,方便综合性学术期刊之间的横向比较,缩小同类期刊的差距,也通过多时段数据便于综合性学术期刊自身纵向对比,长期跟踪评价结果,定位期刊发展的关键问题,为综合性人文社会科学学术期刊特色化发展提供新思路。更多还原

【Abstract】 Multidisciplinary humanities and social sciences journals,accounting for almost half of the officially-approved humanities and social sciences journals in China,are the cradle for the interdisciplinary exchange of humanities and social sciences and play an important role in boosting the prosperity of humanities and social sciences in China.Additionally,the academic influence of multidisciplinary humanities and social sciences journals is crucial to the relevant preponderant disciplines in academic institutions and universities.Such a massive and inclusive academic journal cluster,however,is confronted with a predicament in recent years:the increase in the number of journals brings about various problems including a decline in the overall reputation,lack of creativity,and repeated publication with a low academic standard.Therefore,it leads to the weakening of the characteristics of studies in the field of humanities and social sciences in China.The most important factor leading to the above-mentioned problems is that there is not an appropriate evaluation system according to the characteristics of multidisciplinary humanities and social sciences journals.The problems of current evaluation system include unclear development plans,vague categorization and weak index pertinence.Therefore,improving the quality assessment system of multidisciplinary humanities and social sciences journals has now become an urgent issue.Firstly,it is an urgent task to conduct an in-depth study of the features of the content of these journals and establish a relevant categorization system according to the content.The second urgent task is to avoid undifferentiated assessment and construct an assessment system that takes different research paradigms into consideration.Furthermore,the quality of multidisciplinary humanities and social sciences journals must be reflected from different perspectives through an intensive study of various qualitative assessment approaches as well as a wide range of quantitative assessment results,hence avoiding purely quantitative assessment and building an assessment system specially designed for multidisciplinary humanities and social sciences journals.Last but not least,localized data sources should be combined with an in-depth study of advanced quantitative assessment systems home and abroad so as to expand the scope of the influence of academic journals and incorporate the important academic accomplishment of“academic works”into the assessment system of journals.This study introduces the concept of "inclusive development" to the study of academic journal assessment for the first time and discusses the feasibility of applying this concept to academic journal assessment from the perspectives of a wide participation of academic communities,comprehensive penetration of assessment index,transparency of assessment process and characterized development of different journals promoted by assessment results.The design of overall assessment index emphasizes comprehensiveness,penetrability,scientificity and reversibility.Consequently,a quality assessment system of multidisciplinary humanities and social sciences journals can be established on the basis of the features of these journals.The assessment results,being more inclusive and constructive,can promote the development of multidisciplinary humanities and social sciences journals,which serve as a garden for all disciplines of philosophy and social sciences to flourish.This study is conducted under a "Academic All-Round Evaluation System"framework combined with the bibliometric principles and aims to study quality assessment of multidisciplinary humanities and social sciences journals through questionnaires interviews,library research and statistical analysis.Based on the opinions of academic community,an assessment model is established,and assessment index and objective weightiness are decided upon in a scientific way.In terms of assessment of form,emphasis is placed on academic norms,institutional guarantee,team construction and publication standards;in terms of assessment of content,assessment results that reflect the quality of multidisciplinary humanities and social sciences journal are collected from the perspectives of integrity of papers,quality of disciplinary edition and qualitative governmental award by fully employing the results of qualitative assessment of various academic communities.In terms of assessment of effectiveness,assessments are made from the aspects of present,short-term and long-term effects of academic papers with effectiveness assessment index of different periods of time by adopting the approach of "citation assessment" in which the entire academic community is engaged.Furthermore,assessments of high-level effect and top-layer effect of papers are also made by combining the influence of publishing papers on journals at different levels and presenting results with quantitative indices.At last,assessment results of an organic,scientific and syncretic combination of quantitative and qualitative methods are obtained by using results of a comprehensive set of qualitative assessment and adopting the approach of structural equation model and fitting of models.This study verifies the results with 127 multidisciplinary humanities and social sciences journals and studies the categorization of these journals based on the content of papers:multidisciplinary academic journals(emphasizing humanities),multidisciplinary academic journals(emphasizing social sciences)and multidisciplinary social sciences journals.Data related to index of form assessment,content assessment and effectiveness assessment of 127 multidisciplinary humanities and social sciences journals are collected and inclusive assessment model is verified by employing the inclusive assessment model.Then the data are clustered with the method of twice two-step clustering and journals are categorized as firs-rate,excellent and good.Assessment results are then verified through interviews with experts and analysis has been made on the differences between results of inclusive assessment and those of other assessments,providing suggestions for characterized development of multidisciplinary humanities and social sciences journals.The results of the inclusive" Academic All-Round Evaluation System " model show that it is more reasonable and convincing,and it has been approved by some peer experts.The significance of this study is the introduction of the concept of "inclusive development" to the assessment of journals,enriching theories for studying assessment of humanities and social sciences journals.An assessment model combining the concept of "inclusive development" and the "Academic All-Round Evaluation System" framework helps broaden the quantitative index base of bibliometrics and covers a wide range of qualitative index of content assessment as well as reasonable quantitative index system.It is an attempt to rectify the current situation of purely quantitative assessment and to establish an assessment system focusing on the quality of content.It also emphasizes the importance of categorized assessment and is a tentative exploration of categorizing system of multidisciplinary humanities and social sciences journals based on content.Verification is made on the basis of multidisciplinary humanities and social sciences,providing a new perspective of development of these journals.The quality assessment model of this study is of general guiding significance for making horizontal comparison between multidisciplinary academic journals and narrowing the gap between journals of the same kind.In addition,data from different periods of time facilitate making vertical comparison of multidisciplinary academic journals,tracing assessment results in the long run and figuring out key problems during the development of journals,hence providing new approaches and suggestions for the quality elevation and characterized development of multidisciplinary humanities and social sciences journals.更多还原