文章摘要
付晓霞,李贵存.对BioMed Central撤销中国论文的思考.编辑学报,2015,27(6):514-518
对BioMed Central撤销中国论文的思考
Thoughts about the retraction event of Chinese authors by BioMed Central
投稿时间:2015-03-27  修订日期:2015-03-27
DOI:
中文关键词: 期刊  论文  撤稿
英文关键词: journal  article  retraction
基金项目:
作者单位
付晓霞 《中华健康管理学杂志》编辑部 
李贵存 中华医学会杂志社:100710,北京 
摘要点击次数: 551
全文下载次数: 0
中文摘要:
      本次BioMed Central(BMC)撤销中国论文的原因是同行评议专家的邮箱存在造假,进而影响了同行评议的公正性,造假行为是语言润色公司自作主张,还是论文的作者直接参与其中还有待调查。从这一事件可以看出:一方面,BMC旗下的某些期刊对审稿专家审核不严格,同行评议过程出现漏洞;另一方面,由于我国学术评价体系存在对SCI收录期刊不加区分,“唯SCI是从”的倾向,造成中国科研人员存在发表SCI论文的迫切需求,在语言仍然是一大障碍的情况下,求助于语言润色公司就成了必然的选择。针对以上问题,我们应该修正唯SCI的学术评价体系,对SCI期刊区别对待,增大中文期刊在学术评价体系中的比重,增加论文刊后评价,同时,增强我国中文和英文期刊的整体实力,不断探索新的学术出版模式。
英文摘要:
      BioMed Central (BMC), a major publisher of scholarly medical and science articles, has retracted 40 papers from Chinese authors because of "fabricated" peer reviews. It is unclear whether the language editing agencies proposed fabricated reviewers on their behalf or authors proposed fabricated names directly themselves. For one thing, the academic editors of some journals published by BMC failed to review the information of peer reviewers properly. For another, because the academic evaluation system of China depends on SCI excessively, Chinese researchers are keen to publish papers indexed by SCI. While English is still a big obstacle to most Chinese authors, they have to turn to language editing agencies. Thus, we should revise the academic evaluation system, make a difference between the journals indexed by SCI, pay more attention on Chinese journals, improve the academic level of Chinese journals, and explore new model of academic publishing.
查看全文   查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器
关闭