国外期刊小组同行评议与协作同行评议模式研究

【目的】 分析和讨论国外学术期刊中近期开展的小组同行评议与协作同行评议的概念、流程以及优缺点,为国内期刊同行评议制度的改革提供借鉴与参考。【方法】 检索Web of Science、PubMed数据库与网络信息,筛选、整理这两种同行评议模式的相关文献与资料,采用文献综述法进行主题归纳与分析。 【结果】 这两种同行评议模式都可能对改善审稿人表现、提高审稿报告质量以及审稿过程的透明度有一定的作用,但也存在受集体思考的影响、时间投入增加等局限性。【结论】 小组同行评议与协作同行评议模式对我国期刊同行评议的发展和创新有可借鉴之处,国内期刊可在开展集体对话、构建更具互动性的审稿机制、开展线下小组评审等方面作出更多尝试。

Group peer review and collaborative peer review in academic journals abroad

Purposes] This paper analyzes and discusses the concept, process, and pros and cons of group peer review and collaborative peer review recently performed in academic journals abroad, which is expected to serve as a reference for the development and innovation of review patterns of Chinese journals.Methods] Literature and information on the two peer review patterns were retrieved from PubMed, Web of Science, and other websites, and systematic literature review was conducted for theme summary and analysis. Findings] The two peer review patterns can improve reviewers' performance, review report quality, and transparency of review process to a certain extent. However, there are also limitations associated with group thinking and increased time investment.Conclusions] Group peer review and collaborative peer review abroad are of reference value for the development and innovation of peer review process of Chinese journals, particularly in promoting collective dialogue, interactive peer-review mechanisms, and offline group review.