期刊
SCIENCE AND PUBLIC POLICY
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -出版社
OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/scipol/scad052
关键词
journal lists; valuation regimes; reactivity; epistemic cultures; Chinese science
This study investigates the reception of journal lists among Chinese scientists and finds that researchers consider institutional evaluation regimes, epistemic cultures, and the influence of the commercial publishing industry when selecting publication outlets.
Lists of endorsed and discouraged scholarly publications recently emerged as an important transition in Chinese journal evaluation. Among the targeted users of these lists are researchers, who are to avoid publishing in discouraged journals and focus efforts on endorsed journals. However, it is unclear how these lists affect researchers' valuations when choosing publication outlets. This explorative study investigates the reception of such journal lists in Chinese scientists' research practices. Our findings suggest that three logics interact in respondents' journal valuations: institutional evaluation regimes, differing epistemic cultures, and the influence of the commercial publishing industry. The reactive effects of both endorsed and discouraged journal lists appear to differ with the ranking status of universities, the seniority of scholars, and research fields. Apart from the new institutional evaluation regimes in this interplay, there appear to be more predominant factors than journal lists that inform publishing choices: quantitative indicators, publishers' branding, epistemic cultures, and editorial procedures and publishing models.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据