医学期刊应重视编辑与读者和作者的关系

医学期刊编辑、读者、作者是学术交流舞台的主体,三者相互影响,相互制约.编辑作为联系读者和作者的纽带,应坚持“为读者办刊”的理念,在深入了解读者需求的基础上充分保证期刊的可读性和实用性;同时要不断强化对作者的培养意识和服务意识,促进并帮助作者产出优秀的成果,提高期刊的传播力和影响力,促进学术期刊的健康发展.     

高校期刊优秀编辑团队建设途径研究

学术期刊对科研成果的发表及转化十分重要,优秀编辑团队是保证期刊质量的重要因素,文章深入探讨优秀编辑团队建设的必要性,并从打造优秀团队带头人促进团队发展;培养团队意识提升团队协作能力;重视编辑人才培养、强化编辑创新能力;建立健全管理制度优化考核机制;认真思考持续改进真正发挥团队的优势等几个方面探讨了优秀编辑团队建设的途径,为其他期刊优秀编辑团队的建设提供参考。     

科技期刊编辑运用网络论坛发现培养作者探究——以体育在线论坛为例

学术期刊的良性可持续发展不仅需要得到优秀学者群体的支持,而且也要不断地发现培养青年学者,以此形成强大且富有潜力的供稿资源.以体育在线论坛为例,总结科技期刊编辑运用网络论坛发现培养作者的方法策略.     

一流学术期刊建设视阈下学术期刊编辑的使命与担当

当前,我国正在大力推动一流学术期刊建设,党和国家高度重视学术研究交流和学术期刊的繁荣发展,对做好学术期刊出版工作提出明确要求,有关部门先后出台培育世界一流期刊和推动学术期刊繁荣发展的指导意见.学术期刊编辑是保证学术期刊持续出版的专业人才,其政治素养、业务素质和创新能力直接关系到学术期刊的出版导向、出版质量和出版水平.学术期刊编辑不仅要对自己肩负的重要使命有清晰认识,还需要不断提高自身素质,通过提升出版导向把关能力、学术研究引领能力、编辑策划执行能力、作者队伍培养能力和传播方式创新能力来提高履职能力.     

学术期刊的品牌战略

学术期刊的品牌之路在于编辑培养、作者队伍建设、审稿专家数据库建立、办刊特色、引文等方面 ,论文作者结合其在《中国有色金属学报》的编辑实践经验 ,对上述品牌战略的实施提出了一些具体意见 ,可供学术期刊同仁参考。     

高校学术期刊编辑与作者有效沟通的思考

高校学术期刊编辑与作者的有效沟通是推进期刊顺利出版的关键环节.正确对待编辑与作者的关系对高校学术期刊编辑做好出版工作具有重要意义.基于此,笔者简要阐述了编辑与作者的关系,针对高校学术期刊作者群体的特点,着重分析了学术期刊编辑与专家教授作者、与研究生作者以及退修稿作者的沟通现状,提出了学术期刊编辑与作者有效沟通的几点对策.     

学术期刊编辑服务科研的策略

为了保证期刊优质稿源的稳定性,学术期刊编辑应从提供论文写作规范和技巧、专业期刊信息、科研前沿信息和文献资源信息等方面充分发挥为科研服务的职能,提高科研人员的科研能力和水平,培育稳定的优秀作者群和潜在的为期刊投稿的学术团队,提高他们写出优秀稿件的能力。     

利用专业学术期刊的特点办好期刊

专业学术期刊的特点主要有学科性和专业性强,相对固定的作者群和读者群,读者、作者、审稿者之间的相互转换等。在编辑工作中可以利用这些特点,努力做好以下工作:加强专业基础知识的学习,主动培养潜在的作者队伍和审稿专家队伍,学习优秀专业期刊的办刊经验,定位明确,挖掘特色。     

学术期刊编辑与作者心理契约探究

本文基于心理契约理论,分析了学术期刊编辑与作者心理契约的内涵及基本特征,并根据中国文化背景下心理契约的三维结构理论,建构了学术期刊编辑与作者心理契约的结构维度,即编辑与作者的规范型责任、人际型责任和发展型责任,并剖析了学术期刊编辑与作者心理契约违背的表现、原因及后果,从编辑和作者两方面分别阐述了促进学术期刊编辑与作者心理契约履行的路径。     

英文版科技期刊编辑培养优秀作者群的策略

优秀作者群是提升科技期刊质量的重要保障。数字出版时代下,英文版科技期刊编辑应善于发现和培养优秀作者群。针对国内外不同的作者群,本文采用了不同的培养策略:举办英文科技论文写作培训班、稿件处理过程中与作者互动、移动平台等方式培养国内优秀作者群;发挥国际编委主动性、期刊带头举办国际学术会议、选取重要国外作者为审稿人以及科技期刊编辑参加国际学术会议等方式培养国外优秀作者群。     

一种全新的学术出版模式:开放存取出版模式探析

开放存取是一种学术信息共享的自由理念和出版机制。其产生背景主要是:基于订阅 的学术期刊传统出版模式带来了严重的学术交流障碍;网络的运用使学术期刊出版和传播成本 大大降低。近年来相关的机构和项目已出现并初步取得成效。参考文献12。     

Hidden connections: Network effects on editorial decisions in four computer science journals

This paper aims to examine the influence of authors’ reputation on editorial bias in scholarly journals. By looking at eight years of editorial decisions in four computer science journals, including 7179 observations on 2913 submissions, we reconstructed author/referee-submission networks. For each submission, we looked at reviewer scores and estimated the reputation of submission authors by means of their network degree. By training a Bayesian network, we estimated the potential effect of scientist reputation on editorial decisions. Results showed that more reputed authors were less likely to be rejected by editors when they submitted papers receiving negative reviews. Although these four journals were comparable for scope and areas, we found certain journal specificities in their editorial process. Our findings suggest ways to examine the editorial process in relatively similar journals without recurring to in-depth individual data, which are rarely available from scholarly journals.     

Open access journal publishing in the Nordic countries

The number of open access (OA) journals and their share of all scholarly journals are usually estimated based on indexing in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). DOAJ's coverage of OA journals from different regions of the world is, however, far from complete, particularly of journals publishing in languages other than English. Using alternative data sources for identification and manual verification, 437 scholarly OA journals published in the five Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden) were identified, and some key characteristics were studied. Of these, only 184 were indexed in DOAJ. A vast majority of the journals was published by scholarly societies or universities. Social sciences and humanities dominated as topics, and few journals charge authors. National or university‐specific OJS portals have played a major role in enabling OA publishing. Around a third of the Nordic scholarly journals are currently OA.     

Iranian Scholarly Journals 2.0: An Updated Annotated Bibliography

This is an update of the authors’ annotated bibliography of Iranian peer-reviewed scholarly journals that was published in 2010 in the Serials Librarian. The total number of scholarly journals published in Iran increased from 503 to 1,176 journals in 2017. The forty top journals ranked by impact factor from eight different disciplines are presented in this article. The entry for each journal includes the following information: title, subject, date founded, frequency, editor, language, publisher, address, phone number, FAX number, web address, International Standard Serial Number, indexing/abstracting sources, impact factor, ministry, and an abstract/annotation.     

学术探索与学报质量

探索性是高级学术期刊的重要质量指标之一。本文结合办刊实践经验对学术探索与学报质量的关系做了分析探讨,提出了探索性是超前思维的源泉;开展百家争鸣是提高学报质量的有效途径等观点。     

科技期刊优秀作者队伍建设

为了实现科技期刊的可持续发展,应加强优秀作者队伍梯队建设,将作者分为潜力作者、优秀作者和专家型作者等3类,指出针对不同作者应分别采取不同的发展策略:应在情感上和学术上培养潜力作者,并应重点培养博士作者;巩固期刊的固有优秀作者,通过提高期刊影响力吸引优秀作者;应依靠专家型作者,赋予其特约主编等权利。通过采取上述策略,可以促进科技期刊优秀作者队伍的稳定和不断发展壮大,从而为期刊的发展奠定坚实基础。     

Scholarly journal use and reading behavior of social scientists in Taiwan

This paper reports on a study of social scientists’ information seeking and use of scholarly journals to support scholarly communication and information needs. The goals of the study are: to explore the characteristics of information needs for social scientists; to discuss the importance of scholarly journals to social scientists and their information seeking and access means; to identify article reading patterns of social scientists; and to make comparisons between scholarly journals use and reading patterns of social scientists and other scientists in Taiwan and the USA. The author used a questionnaire survey and interview methods to investigate the information seeking, use and reading of scholarly journals, and article deep reading patterns of social scientists. The target population was social science faculty members from National Cheng-chi University in Taiwan. The article explores the characteristics of information needs for social scientists and shows that scholarly journals are important information resources for university social science faculty. Social science faculty in Taiwan use scholarly journals in multiple languages, mainly English, Chinese, German, and Japanese, which is different from scientists in the United States. In addition, they use electronic journals more than print journals. The number of article readings by social science faculty members was approximately 195 readings per year and nearly 440 h were spent reading per year. In contrast to scientists in the United States, the social scientists in Taiwan read fewer readings, spent more time reading, and read older articles. In addition, the study identifies article reading patterns of social scientists and proposes a six-type taxonomy of article deep reading. The study reports the scholarly journal use and reading behavior model of social scientists and shows there are some differences in scholarly journal seeking and use by social science faculty in Taiwan and scientists in the United States. Further studies of scholarly journal and electronic journal use and reading by social scientists across countries, subject disciplines, and languages of journals are needed.     

Similarity network fusion for scholarly journals

This paper explores intellectual and social proximity among scholarly journals by using network fusion techniques. Similarities among journals are initially represented by means of a three-layer network based on co-citations, common authors and common editors. The information contained in the three layers is then combined by building a fused similarity network. The fusion consists in an unsupervised process that exploits the structural properties of the layers. Subsequently, partial distance correlations are adopted for measuring the contribution of each layer to the structure of the fused network. Finally, the community morphology of the fused network is explored by using modularity. In the three fields considered (i.e. economics, information and library sciences and statistics) the major contribution to the structure of the fused network arises from editors. This result suggests that the role of editors as gatekeepers of journals is the most relevant in defining the boundaries of scholarly communities. In information and library sciences and statistics, the clusters of journals reflect sub-field specializations. In economics, clusters of journals appear to be better interpreted in terms of alternative methodological approaches.     

Scholarly communication and open access: Perspectives from Korea

This article reports on scholarly communication and open access (OA) in Korea. Drawing on a range of databases, articles, and reference sources, it provides unique insights. In contrast to the UK/US model of scholarly communication, in Korea, most scholarly journals are published by discipline‐based scholarly societies and research institutes affiliated to universities. Payment for publication is the norm, and typically features article processing charges and scholarly society membership fees for both OA and toll access (TA) journals. Online access to journals in Korea is provided by commercial vendors who enter into contracts with the scholarly societies for exclusive use. Three online access models apply – TA, gold OA, and dual access – with the use of these models varying between disciplines. In parallel with this access provided by commercial vendors, there are a number of government‐funded open access repositories (OARs) to which university researchers are requested to deposit their research outputs, as well as OARs run by universities and other research institutes.