hanghai was revealed on g researcher was able lently added to five SCI use she had a relations stem from the probcademic journals. now has a misconceppact factor of a journal is ournal,” Jing said. sed to measure the imy calculating the yearly es selected articles are w years. stances, Chinese to publish their new first, instead of domestic natural science. flect on our evaluation e’ve seen systematic field of natural science, equired to publish two to three SCI articles and another Chinese article,” Jing noted.
CASSES has made another step forward to improve this situation by establishing its own evaluation model for humanities and social science journals. The model is called AMI, which stands for attraction, management power and impact power.
Attraction, refers to a journal’s awards, quality and peer review results. Management power covers any academic misconduct and adherence to institutional norms by the journal. Impact power refers to a journal’s academic, social and international influence.
In Jing’s opinion, this creates a multidimensional quantitative and qualitative evaluation system that can help evaluate academic journals and think tanks.
The Centre for Science and Technology Studies at Leiden University in Netherlands and the Norway-based Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education have shown great interest in the system, according to Jing, who is ready to promote China’s evaluation system in Europe.
One of the purposes of the workshop is to familiarize Chinese researchers with the global peer review process and accelerating their entrance to global academia.
In the West, articles fall under scrutiny of two to three often-anonymous experts in the same field to make sure the final work meets publishing requirements.
At Taylor & Francis, an associate editor finds two reviewers on the web using science and reviewer finder tools.
Jing told the Global Times that peer reviewers in the West usually work for free and only for a few times a year. By comparison, Chinese peer reviewers may be asked to review papers multiple times in a year, and hence are paid.
He said that a high number of peer reviewers can benefit a country in two ways: giving it more power to vote on international standards and putting it in a leading position of academic power.
“The more papers you publish and the more members in an institute, the higher your academic position. Talents decide a country’s competitiveness,” Jing said.
Regarding carrying out peer review for international journals, Marshall encourages Chinese researchers increase their profile with editors as much as possible.
“My suggestion is to get known by the journals,” she advised.
Sienho Yee, editor-in-chief of the Chinese Journal of International Law, told the Global Times that the key to improving Chinese researchers’ profile is to carry out high-quality research.
“An entire paragraph of my work was once quoted by a judge at the International Court of Justice, because my research and analysis could support the judge, not because I am Chinese,” Yee said.
Jing echoed Yee, noting that a major challenge is that many Chinese academics lack the ability to explain or summarize China’s achievements in different fields.
“Most people wear a pair of tinted spectacles to look at Chinese issues,” Jing said.
“If we Chinese don’t take the initiative to introduce our country, how can foreigners? No wonder their understanding is so one-sided.”
Continued academic exchanges
Jing said that open and fair international exchanges in academic fields should continue even though the US is wary of Chinese researchers.
“It is obvious [US President Donald] Trump’s policy [to suspect Chinese researchers] is not sustainable. The US is a country of immigrants. If the US does not open its doors, it will fade at a faster speed,” Jing told the Global Times.
He encouraged Chinese researchers to make their voices heard among international academia and visit the US for academic exchanges, as “the US is the highland of global scientific research.”
The mineral engineering graduate student is also looking forward to more Chinese voices being heard and Chinese researchers helping connect China and the world.
dean of the China Academy of Social Sciences Evaluation Studies
Scan to read and share story on your phone
A new Chinese system Chinese researchers from major universities attend a peer review workshop organized by the China Academy of Social Sciences Evaluation Studies (CASSES) and the Taylor & Francis Group on Friday in Beijing.