Evaluation of academic journals in field of humanities and social sciences in China:Theoretical expansion,multi-source data,and methodological innovation
[Purposes]This study aims to systematically explore the evaluation of academic journals in the humanities and social sciences in China under the new situation,focusing on theoretical guidance for evaluation schemes,data-supported evaluation practices,and methodological implementation of evaluation work.[Methods]Using methods such as literature review,logical analysis,and summarization,based on local practices and international experience,we constructed a three-dimensional framework for evaluating academic journals in the humanities and social sciences.[Findings]In terms of theoretical logic,based on the paradigm of humanities and social sciences research,adjustments from uniform standards to classified evaluations,expansions from academic influence to social impact,and transitions from summative evaluation to formative evaluation are discussed,providing a theoretical basis for the formulation of evaluation schemes.Regarding multi-source data,addressing the heterogeneous data characteristics of the humanities and social sciences,macroscopic and microscopic paths for database construction are designed to support the scientificity of evaluation practices.In terms of methodological implementation,addressing the challenges of journal evaluation in the humanities and social sciences,emphasis is placed on the expansion and integration of peer review and scientometric analysis.[Conclusions]The evaluation of journals in the humanities and social sciences in China needs to draw on international experience based on policy orientation and local practices,exploring development paths for evaluation schemes tailored to Chinese characteristics from three dimensions:theory,data,and methodology.
Humanities and social sciencesEvaluation of academic journalTheoretical logicMulti-source dataMethodological innovation
NETL
NSTL
万方数据
