摘要
为了合理地分配、使用有限的资源(如期刊杂志的版面、研究经费和实验室的设备),有必要首先对科学家的工作质量作出判断。同行评审(peer review)就是一种最常用的方法。这个具有国际性的方法是现代科学结构中最为重要的部分之一。随着中国科学技术结构的改革和国家科学基金会的建立,认真思考同行评审这个制度的利弊对中国科学家尤为重要。本文回顾了西方对期刊文章的质量和研究经费的分配进行同行评审的实践。
The use of peer review to allocate scarce resources (e. g., research funding and publication) exerts a powerful influence on the development of science. Advocates argue that peer review insures the quality and reliability of research and protects the independence of science. Critics complain, however, that the system unfairly favors eminent scientists from elite institutions. Moreover, unscrupulous investigators may abuse the system. The few studies which have been conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of peer review suggest that, while there is little systematic bias, random factors strongly influence reviewers' decisions. In other words, while the system may be fair, it is not entirely rational. While most U. S. scientists agree that peer review, despite its imperfections, is the best method to evaluate the quality of scientists' research, most also agree that the system can be improved to make it fairer and less dependent on chance.
出处
《自然辩证法通讯》
1988年第4期25-32,80,共9页
Journal of Dialectics of Nature
