Among them, the relative indicators, such as rejection rate, impact factors, and the proportion of funded papers, emphasize the contribution and influence of the papers published in this journal to the disciplines classified in the Catalogue of China Core Journals, but cannot reflect the contribution of the papers published in this journal to other disciplines within the scope of publication.
This is unfair to professional comprehensive academic journals, and the evaluation results cannot truly and objectively reflect the academic level and influence of these journals. In view of this problem, this paper puts forward some suggestions on improving the outline of Chinese core journals.
Extended data:
Since the first edition of Compendium of China Core Journals (hereinafter referred to as Compendium) was published, every new edition will set off a wave in academic and periodical circles. The list of core journals is like a magic wand, which guides the author's submission direction, affects the quantity and quality of submissions, and is related to the development of journals. Therefore, the accuracy and fairness of the evaluation of core journals are very important.
Some defects in the setting of evaluation indicators and statistical methods in Overview lead to some deviations in the quantitative evaluation results, which cannot objectively and accurately reflect the academic level and comprehensive influence of comprehensive academic journals in the industry and is unfair to comprehensive academic journals.
People's Network —— Reflections on the Evaluation System of Chinese Core Journals
Baidu Encyclopedia-Chinese Core Periodical