同行评议制度的公正性与局限性
|
摘要
同行评议制度被公认为是用于专业评审的最好制度,其决策依据是建立在科学、专业的基础上,能有效地避免外行的干预和决策权力的滥用或过分集中。由于评议人认识的限制和同行评议中存在的利益冲突或利益相关,同行评议制度公正性常受到质疑。随着科学研究的发展,对同行评议制度提出了新的要求,作者试图针对这些问题提出相应的解决办法,希望能增加同行评议制度的公正性减少其局限性。
Peer review is widely carried out by funding organizations and journal press due to its impartiality.But the weakness of the mechanism by peer review is also realized because of reviewers'interest conflicts and little understanding about specific scientific questions,which become more serious especially with the development of science research.We try to propose some new approaches for improving the quality of peer review.
Peer review is widely carried out by funding organizations and journal press due to its impartiality.But the weakness of the mechanism by peer review is also realized because of reviewers'interest conflicts and little understanding about specific scientific questions,which become more serious especially with the development of science research.We try to propose some new approaches for improving the quality of peer review.
引文
[1]吴述尧.同行评议方法论.北京:科学出版社,1996.
[2]National Science Foundation's Merit Review Criteria:Review and Revisions.(2011-12-14).https://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2011/meritreviewcriteria.pdf.
[3]江虎军,冯雪莲,冯峰,等.科学合理设置评议表提高同行评议的有效性和公正性.中国基础科学,2008,10(6):46-49.
[4]NIH.Scoring Guidance.https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/review/rev_prep/scoring.htm.
[5]NSF.Transparency and Accountability.https://www.nsf.gov/od/transparency/transparency.jsp.
[6]HHMI.About Us.https://www.hhmi.org/about/history.
[2]National Science Foundation's Merit Review Criteria:Review and Revisions.(2011-12-14).https://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2011/meritreviewcriteria.pdf.
[3]江虎军,冯雪莲,冯峰,等.科学合理设置评议表提高同行评议的有效性和公正性.中国基础科学,2008,10(6):46-49.
[4]NIH.Scoring Guidance.https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/review/rev_prep/scoring.htm.
[5]NSF.Transparency and Accountability.https://www.nsf.gov/od/transparency/transparency.jsp.
[6]HHMI.About Us.https://www.hhmi.org/about/history.