文章摘要
学术期刊建立申诉机制的实践研究及启示
Insight to establishing editorial mechanism against appeals for rejected manuscripts// DING Zuoqi
投稿时间:2017-12-12  修订日期:2018-02-10
DOI:
中文关键词: 同行评审  申诉机制  对策
英文关键词: peer review  mechanism of appeals  strategies
基金项目:江苏省社科基金(17TQB004)资助
作者单位E-mail
丁佐奇 中国药科大学 zqding1028@163.com 
摘要点击次数: 101
全文下载次数: 
中文摘要:
      作者对退稿意见不满的现象十分普遍,但目前国内外学术期刊普遍缺乏针对评审意见的申诉机制。笔者在《中国天然药物》编辑部近年来处理退稿作者申诉意见的实践心得基础上,结合国内外学术期刊退稿申诉中的常见类型分析,提出学术期刊应建立明确的申诉机制及妥善处理申诉意见的公开程序与措施,包括:编辑初审退稿应具有明确的依据;针对申诉意见避免格式化回复;及时按规定程序处理申诉意见,提高和作者的沟通效率;重视复审,加强对申诉稿件修改稿的比对工作;制订公开、透明、具体的退稿申诉机制,以期推动退稿申诉工作规范化,最终降低申诉率。研究指出学术期刊建立退稿申诉机制有利于培养忠实作者,弥 补同行评议的局限性,提升期刊的美誉度和信任度。
英文摘要:
      Appeals from authors against the peer referees’ criticisms and/or negative editorial decisions are becoming universal across the field of academic journals. However, there is currently no efficient editorial mechanisms for addressing such appeals. Based on the practice of Chinese Journal of Natural Medicines together with the analysis of common reasons for appeals, we suggested that it is important for academic journals to establish appropriate, transparent and justified mechanisms to resolving appeals of manuscript rejection from authors. A series of practicable strategies were proposed: rejecting manuscripts at the first screen with specific comments which are sufficiently to support a decision of rejection; writing letter to appeal politely with adequate and sufficient reasons and avoiding formatted rejection letter; improving communication skills with authors; strengthening re-review of re-submitted manuscripts and making a careful comparison between the original edition and the resubmitted edition; and pointing out clearly online the mechanisms and procedures for various kinds of appeals/rebuttals. With improved appeals-addressing mechanisms, academic journals may become more trustable and attractive to more authors, complementing to potential limitations of peer review and thereby improving the reputation of journals.
View Fulltext   查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器
关闭