中国人文社会科学期刊综合评价体系的建构与实践

The Construction and Practice of a Comprehensive Evaluation System of Humanities and Social Sciences Journals in China

期刊评价是推进我国学术评价科学化、合理化和伦理化的路径之一。期刊量化评价主要是文献计量学框架下的核心期刊评价体系,它根据文献的集中与分散规律,建构了一套影响因子类的评价指标;而期刊定性评价则以同行评议为主,基于专家的主观评价和打分,其方法体系和制度设计尚不明确。现阶段,我国人文社会科学学术期刊评价项目尚处在从“简单量化”评价到“综合评价”的过渡阶段,面临着评价主体权威性、评价方法科学化、评价的公共性悖论等多元困境。在学术评价视域下审视我国期刊评价体系的建设应正确处理评价的科学性、公共性和社会性的关系,应实现从工具理性到价值理性的回归,建构量化和质化评价的综合方法体系,汇聚期刊发展的利益相关人,建立评价的双向沟通平台和共享价值体系。专业性评价机构要承担起期刊评价的学术责任与使命,探索建构包含评价价值理念、理论方法、指标体系和制度机制的科学合理、公开透明的期刊综合评价体系。

Journal evaluation is one of the ways to promote the scientific,rational and ethical academic evaluation in China.The quantitative evaluation of periodicals is the core periodical evaluation system under the framework of bibliometrics.According to the law of centralization and decentralization,this system constructs a set of evaluation indexes of influencing factors,while the qualitative evaluation is dominated by peer review,which is based on the subjective evaluation and scoring of experts,and its methods and system design are not clear enough.At present,the evaluation system of liberal journals is still in the transition from“simple quantitative”evaluation to“comprehensive evaluation”.It is faced with multiple dilemmas,such as the authority of the evaluation subject,the scientification of the evaluation methods,and the paradox of the publicity of the evaluation.An introspection of the current evaluation system from the angle of academic assessment prompts us to examine whether the evaluation is scientific,public and socialized.We need to realize the return from instrumental rationality to value rationality in the principle of evaluation,construct a comprehensive method system of quantitative and qualitative evaluation,gather all stakeholders of journal development,and establish a two-way communication platform and shared value system of evaluation.Professional evaluation institutions should undertake the academic responsibility and mission of journal evaluation,and explore the construction of a scientific,reasonable,open and transparent journal evaluation system including evaluation value,theory,methods,index system and institutional mechanism.