Author:
Calvert Philip J.,Zengzhi Shi
Abstract
Journal quality is typically assessed in quantitative terms. This IFLA‐funded pilot project used strictly qualitative criteria to assess library and information science journal quality in China. The Chinese LIS journal publishing scene is described and its strengths and weaknesses examined. Five LIS journal editors were interviewed to gather their ideas about what makes for good journal quality, and what they wanted to achieve in their journals. Articles from their journals were scored on six criteria to determine the editor’s success in achieving their stated objectives. Best scores were for “new information or data” and the worst were for “appropriate methodology and analysis”.
Subject
Library and Information Sciences
Reference9 articles.
1. Ali, S.N., Young, H.C. and Ali, N.M. (1996), “Determining the quality of publications and research for tenure or promotion decisions: a preliminary checklist to assist”, Library Review, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 39‐53.
2. Anderson, P.(1997), “‘Gatekeepers’ and the quality of the journal literature: findings from a survey of journal editors into the issue of alleged excessive publication in scholarly and scientific journals”, Serials Review, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 45‐57.
3. Chressanthis, G.A. and Chressanthis, J.D. (1993), “The relationship between manuscript submission fees and journal quality’, Serials Librarian, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 71‐86.
4. Day, A. and Peters, J. (1994), ‘‘Quality indicators in academic publishing”, Library Review, Vol. 43 No. 7, pp. 4‐72.
5. Garfield, E. (1977), “Which journals attract the most frequently cited articles?”, in Essay of an Information Scientist, Volume one: 1962‐1973. ISI Press, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 485‐6.
Cited by
11 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献