科技论文审稿方式的问卷调查

Questionnaire for styles of peer review of scientific papers

采用问卷调查的形式,对审稿专家和作者如何看待审稿方式进行了调查。结果表明:有86.8%的审稿人和85.4%的作者都赞同双盲审稿,有88.2%的审稿人和96%的作者都认为,实行双盲审稿,有利于审稿人对稿件进行客观、公正的评审;48.4%的作者和31.6%的审稿人认为,如果审者与作者从事的研究工作类似,编辑在选择审稿人时应采取回避政策。本文建议某些专业面相对较窄的期刊可实行双盲审稿,而大多数高校自然科学学报可以实行单盲审稿。

The factors influencing the selection of peer review styles from the reviewers and authors were investigated through questionnaire.The surveying results show that 86.8% of reviewers and 85.4% of authors approve adopting double-blind peer review;88.2% of reviewers and 96% of authors admit the impersonality and impartiality of double-blind peer review;and 31.6% of reviewers and 48.4% of authors think that the editorial board should avoid selecting the reviewers who undertake the similar researches with authors.It is suggested that some scientific journals which have narrow specialties can adopt double-blind peer review,but most university journals can select single-blind peer review.