文章摘要
张春丽,倪四秀,宋晓林. 科技期刊学术不良行为认知与管控研究——基于作者、编辑和审稿专家的问卷调查分析. 中国科技期刊研究, 2018, 29(12): 1201-1207
科技期刊学术不良行为认知与管控研究——基于作者、编辑和审稿专家的问卷调查分析
Cognition and control about improper academic conduct in scientific journals: Based on questionnaire survey of authors, editors, and reviewers
投稿时间:2018-06-26  修订日期:2018-09-25
DOI:10.11946/cjstp.201806260563
中文关键词: 科技期刊  学术不良行为  问卷调查  管控措施
英文关键词: Scientific journal  Improper academic conduct  Questionnaire survey  Countermeasure
摘要点击次数: 319
全文下载次数: 386
基金项目:2017年中国科学院自然科学期刊编辑研究会研究课题(Y7B6011001),江苏高校哲学社会科学研究项目(2017SJB0955),江苏师范大学人文社会科学基金项目高校图书馆知识服务创新与实现路径研究(15XWA04)
作者单位E-mail
张春丽 中国科学院东北地理与农业生态研究所《中国地理科学(英文版)》编辑部,吉林省长春市高新北区盛北大街4888号 130102 zhangcl@iga.ac.cn 
倪四秀 江苏师范大学图书馆,江苏省徐州市铜山新区上海路101号 221116 qrb@jsnu.edu.cn 
宋晓林 中国科学院东北地理与农业生态研究所《地理科学》编辑部,吉林省长春市高新北区盛北大街4888号 130102  
中文摘要:
      【目的】 分析学术不良的行为表现、原因及责任主体,并提出管控措施。【方法】 论文以作者、编辑和审稿专家为调查对象,围绕科技期刊学术不良行为总体态度和认知、学术不良行为表现认知和学术不良行为产生的原因及主要责任主体认知三个问题,对科技期刊学术不良行为进行调查研究。【结果】 科技期刊学术不良行为已引起广泛关注,作者、编辑和审稿专家均持抵制态度;对科技期刊学术不良行为表现的认知局限于学术腐败、学术道德和学术规范层面,而对学术评价体系和价值导向层面关注不够;科技期刊学术不良行为产生的原因是多元的,以往多关注作者、编辑和审稿专家方面的主观行为,忽视了学术评价标准及价值导向等客观方面的不足,导致科技期刊作者发文目的偏差;从学术不良行为责任主体来看,作者本人、大学和科研机构评价体制以及学术监管部门的客观责任主体比直接参与的编辑和审稿专家的主体责任更大。【结论】 应从价值观塑造、评估体系优化、行为监管加强、学术素养培养等方面进行综合管控和防范,以杜绝科技期刊学术不良行为发生。
英文摘要:
      [Purposes] This paper aims to identify the behavior, cause, and responsibility body of improper academic conduct, and proposes the appropriate countermeasures. [Methods] We focused on the three problems including the general attitude towards improper academic conduct, cognition about improper academic conduct, the cognition about the causes and main responsibility body of improper academic conduct based on questionnaire survey of authors, editors, and reviewers. [Findings] Improper academic conduct in scientific journals has caused wide public concerns and most people are resistant to academic improper academic conduct. The cognition of improper academic conduct in scientific journals, confined to academic corruption, academic morality, and academic norm, and there is no enough attention to the academic evaluation system and value orientation. The causes of improper academic conduct in scientific journals are multivariate. In the past, more attention was paid to the subjective behavior of authors, editors, and reviewers, ignoring the objective deficiencies in the academic evaluation standards and the value orientation, resulting in the deviation of the purpose of publishing articles. Main responsibility bodies of improper academic conduct in scientific journals are authors, evaluation system of universities and research institutions, and academic supervision department, instead of editors and reviewers. [Conclusions] We should take measures in terms of shaping right values, optimizing evaluation system, strengthening behavior regulation, and enhancing academic quality to prevent improper academic conduct in scientific journals.
HTML   查看全文   查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器
关闭
微信扫一扫看