“以刊评文”的局限、本质及其辩证应用研究*

俞立平 张再杰 肖成华

(1.浙江工商大学 统计与数学学院 杭州 310018;2.贵州财经大学 贵州绿色发展战略高端智库 贵阳 550025;3.上海浦东发展银行股份有限公司 宁波分行 宁波 315000)

Research on the Limitation, Essence and Dialectical Application of "Evaluating Papers by Journals"

Yu Liping1,2Zhang Zaijie2Xiao Chenghua3

(1.School of Statistics and Mathematics, Zhejiang Gongshang University, Hangzhou 310018; 2.Guizhou Green Development Strategy High End Think Tank, Guizhou University of Finance and Economics, Guiyang 550025; 3.Ningbo Branch, Shanghai Pudong Development Bank, Ningbo 315000)

Abstract:[Purpose/Significance]The phenomenon of "Evaluating papers by journals" has been rooted in China's scientific and technological evaluation for a long time, it is of great significance to study its limitations and essence and to treat it objectively under the background of breaking away from the "four only" and returning to the origin of scientific research.[Method/Process]Based on the analysis of the existing problems and the causes of "Evaluating papers by journals", this paper establishes the user portraits of journal level and research level, demonstrates the essence of it and establishes the comparative framework of paper evaluation. This paper also discusses the comparison of small-sample papers, large-sample papers of the same level, small-sample and large-sample papers of the same level and cross level comparison of large-sample papers.[Result/Conclusion]The results show that the average quality of the journals of the papers can represent the author's level in the case of large-sample. The evaluation of institutions should be based mainly on the evaluation of journals and supplemented by peer review. The personnel evaluation should be based mainly on peer review and supplemented by journal review. "Evaluating papers by journals" could evaluate the scale of scientific research, while the representative evaluation can only evaluate the quality of scientific research.

Keywords: valuating papers by journals； academic evaluation； peer review； bibliometrics

0 引 言

科研研究的本源属性是学术创新和科研质量，科技评价工作应突出这种导向。学术创新与科研质量紧密关联，创新是科研质量的灵魂，从具体表现形势看，科研质量较高意味着原创性强、具有较大的经济和社会效益，或者取得重要的基础研究突破。近两年来，国家相关部门密集出台了一系列文件，以净化科研空气，规范学术评价行为。2018年7月，两办印发《关于深化项目评审、人才评价、机构评估改革的意见》，推行代表作评价制度，明确突出品德、能力、业绩导向，克服“四唯”倾向，注重标志性成果的质量、贡献、影响。2018年10月，科技部、教育部等5部门联合发布《关于开展清理“唯论文、唯职称、唯学历、唯奖项”专项行动的通知》，要求开展清理“四唯”专项行动。2020年2月，教育部、科技部发布《关于规范高等学校SCI论文相关指标使用 树立正确评价导向的若干意见》的通知，提出破除论文“SCI至上”，探索建立科学的评价体系，营造高校良好创新环境。2020年2月科技部印发《关于破除科技评价中“唯论文”不良导向的若干措施(试行)》的通知，强调采用代表作进行评价。

长期以来“以刊评文”现象饱受诟病。所谓“以刊评文”，就是指在人才评价和机构评价等过程中，简单采用论文发表期刊的级别和数量来判断被评价对象的研究水平和贡献，而根本不注重论文研究内容和质量的一种现象。……