文章摘要
徐晓芹,刘晓燕,李春花.基于专家审稿意见的高被引和零被引论文学术质量差异性分析.编辑学报,2015,27(6):564-566
基于专家审稿意见的高被引和零被引论文学术质量差异性分析
Analysis of academic quality difference between highly- and zero-cited papers
投稿时间:2011-04-25  修订日期:2011-04-25
DOI:
中文关键词: 论文学术质量  专家审稿意见  高被引和零被引论文
英文关键词: academic quality of scientific papers  peer reviewers' comments  highly- and zero-cited papers
基金项目:2015年中国科协学术质量提升项目资助
作者单位
徐晓芹 中国农业科学院农业资源与农业区划研究所《植物营养与肥料学报》编辑部,100081,北京 
刘晓燕 中国农业科学院农业资源与农业区划研究所《植物营养与肥料学报》编辑部,100081,北京 
李春花 中国农业科学院农业资源与农业区划研究所《植物营养与肥料学报》编辑部,100081,北京 
摘要点击次数: 344
全文下载次数: 0
中文摘要:
      选择《植物营养与肥料学报》2008—2012年发表的高被引和零被引论文,基于138份同行专家评审意见对这些论文原稿选题和论文质量的分析,阐明高被引与零被引论文内在特征的差异,总结高被引和零被引论文在写作方面存在的一些关键性问题。在此基础上,就编辑如何准确甄别和筛选具有较大学术影响力的稿件,拒绝学术质量差的稿件,抓住稿件退修的关键环节,督促作者落实专家审稿意见等提出建议。
英文摘要:
      Based on the analysis of peer reviewers' comments, we firstly conducted a comparative study of the difference in topic selection and quality between the highly- and zero-cited papers published in Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer from 2008 to 2012. In this paper, we summarize some key problems in the writing of highly- and zero-cited papers. Some suggestions are proposed for the editors on how to accurately identify and screen the manuscripts of great academic influence and refuse those manuscripts of poor quality, as wells as supervise the implementation of the reviewers' comments in manuscript retreat process.
查看全文   查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器
关闭