同行评议的难点

发布时间：2018-09-10 14:14

【摘要】：为了进一步有效推动中国人文社会科学学术成果评价研究工作的发展,促进全社会重视人文社会科学研究繁荣与发展,探讨人文社会科学研究成果评价标准和体系建设,2015年3月31日,中国人民大学书报资料中心和人文社会科学学术成果评价研究中心在北京举办了"人文社会科学学术成果评价论坛",论坛由中国人民大学书报资料中心高自龙总编辑主持,论坛以"同行评议"为主题,这个主题也是目前学术评价中的热门话题。来自全国权威评价机构的知名专家从不同角度进行了生动而有智慧的发言和讨论,高自龙总编辑做了精彩的点评和高度评价。本次笔谈邀请了上述论坛的三位学术评价界的主讲专家对"同行评议"问题进行了深入的思考和探讨。蔡蓉华教授的《同行评议的难点》对学术评价中同行评议的客观现实问题和同行评议的难点进行了讨论,提出了未来的学术评价应该是科学计量和专家智力的组合,没有最好的方法;只有最合适的方法,没有普遍的标准,只有特定的标准。刘益东教授的《开放式评价:替代同行评议的新方案》从发现同行评议和文献计量法的根本缺陷入手,提出了开放式评价法这一替代方案,还解决了对作为学术带头人的前沿学者的界定与甄选问题,为深化科技体制改革与创新驱动战略提供了新思路。伍军红、汤丽云、肖宏教授的《大数据支撑下的创新同行评议》分析了大数据环境和网络化社会中同行评议遇到的挑战和机遇,提出了大数据可以帮助同行评议找到更适合的小同行专家,并为专家提供重复性检测、创新点分析和引证动机挖掘等有力的辅助工具和资料,提出建设"世界科学文献定性评价统计数据库",以解决同行评议面对的问题,使同行评议工作更加系统、科学、客观、公正。现特此刊发,以飨读者。
[Abstract]:In order to further effectively promote the development of the research on the evaluation of academic achievements of Chinese humanities and social sciences, promote the whole society to attach importance to the prosperity and development of the research on Humanities and social sciences, and explore the evaluation criteria and system construction of the research achievements of Humanities and social sciences, on March 31, 2015, the Book and Newspaper Information Center of Renmin University of China and the Academic The Academic Achievements Evaluation Forum of Humanities and Social Sciences was held in Beijing by the fruit evaluation research center. The forum was chaired by Gao Zilong, editor-in-chief of the Book and Newspaper Information Center of Renmin University of China. The theme of the forum is "peer review". This topic is also a hot topic in academic evaluation at present. Mr. Du made lively and wise speeches and discussions, and Mr. Gao Zilong made brilliant comments and high comments. This talk invited three experts from the academic evaluation circles of the above-mentioned forum to think deeply and discuss the issue of "peer review". Professor Cai Ronghua's "Difficulties in peer review" gave peer reviews to peers in academic evaluation. The objective reality of the review and the difficulties of peer review are discussed, and it is pointed out that the future academic evaluation should be a combination of scientific measurement and expert intelligence, without the best method; only the most appropriate method, without universal standards, only specific standards. "Starting with the discovery of the fundamental flaws in peer review and bibliometrics, this paper puts forward the alternative of open evaluation, which also solves the problem of defining and selecting frontier scholars as academic leaders, and provides new ideas for deepening the reform of scientific and technological system and innovation-driven strategy. Professor Wu Junhong, Tang Liyun and Professor Xiaohong's Big Data Branch This paper analyzes the challenges and opportunities faced by peer reviews in large data environments and networked societies, proposes that large data can help peer reviews find more suitable small peer reviewers, and provide powerful supporting tools and data for experts such as repeatability testing, innovation point analysis and citation motivation mining. To solve the problems faced by peer review and make peer review work more systematic, scientific, objective and fair, a statistical database for qualitative evaluation of world scientific literature is set up.
【作者单位】：北京大学图书馆文献计量学研究室;
【分类号】：C12

【相似文献】