[目的/意义]学术评价对整个学术生态系统的发展具有重要意义。以影响因子和谷歌学术指标为视角，跟踪国内外学术评价指标发展的新动态，思考和探索学术评价指标优化发展的可能方向。[方法/过程]分别选取h5指数排名前50的中英文出版物并查询对应影响因子，分析并检验h5指数与影响因子的关系；对比中英文出版物在学科分布、时间范围、"被引"统计标准等方面的异同和优缺点，总结学术评价指标应考虑的诸多因素。从评价主体、评价对象等维度对网络环境下新的学术评价方式进行探索，对Altmetrics、RCR、PubPeer的创新性学术评价实践进行案例分析。[结果/结论]学术评价体系系统而复杂，与学术出版、交流与传播、保存利用等各环节密切关联，科学合理的评价体系应平衡数量与质量、保持客观中立、兼顾内容与形式，应分层次、多维度、全方位进行学术评价。
[Purpose/significance] The academic assessment is of great significance to the academic ecosystem. From the perspectives of impact factors and Google scholar metrics, this paper aims at tracking the trends of the scholar metrics at home and abroad and discussing its possible directions of optimization.[Method/process] This paper firstly selected the top 50 Chinese and English publications ranked by h5-index and inquired their corresponding impact factors, analyzed and verified the relationship between h5-index and impact factors. Comparing the similarities, differences, advantages and disadvantages of Chinese and English publications in terms of discipline distribution, time coverage and statistical standards, this paper summarized the elements that should be considered in scholar metrics. Exploring new methods of scholar metrics from the dimension of subject and object under the network environment, this paper made the case study of Altmetrics, RCR, and PubPeer for their innovative scholar metrics practices.[Result/conclusion] The scholar metric is systematic and comprehensive, having strong association with scholarly publishing, communication, storage and usage. Scientific and rational scholar metrics are expected to be able to balance the quantity and quality, contents and forms of academic achievements and stand on a neutral side as well. Eventually, assessing the journals and individual researchers should be from multiple levels, multiple dimensions and all rounds.
[1] 图书馆员.谷歌推出学术指标,影响因子面临颠覆?[EB/OL].[2016-10-10].http://lib.notefirst.com/techlibrary/19454/default.aspx.
[2] Thomson Reuters. Clarivate analytics[EB/OL].[2016-12-23].http://ipscience.thomsonreuters.com/.
[3] 中国科技网-科技日报.期刊影响因子的"含金量"[EB/OL].[2016-10-10]. http://h.wokeji.com/kbjh/zxbd_10031/201607/t20160722_2717751.shtml.
[4] 新华网.新闻调查:是否该让SCI"走下神坛"[EB/OL].[2016-10-10]. http://news.xinhuanet.com/world/2016-07/26/c_129178334.htm.
[5] American Society for Microbiology.ASM media advisory:ASM no longer supports Impact actors for its Journals[EB/OL].[2016-10-10]. https://www.asm.org/index.php/asm-newsroom2/press-releases/94299-asm-media-advisory-asm-no-longer-supports-impact-factors-for-its-journals.
[6] Garfield E. Citation indexes to science:a new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. Science. 1955,122(3159):108-111.
[7] Garfield E. The history and meaning of the journal impact factor[J].The journal of the American medical association, 2006, 295(1):90-93.
[8] Hirsch J E. An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output[J].Scientometrics, 2010, 102(3):16569-16572.
[9] Google Scholar Blog[EB/OL].[2016-10-16].https://scholar.googleblog.com/2016/07/2016-scholar-metrics-released_14.html.
[10] Google Scholar Metrics.[EB/OL].[2016-10-16].https://scholar.google.com/scholar/metrics.html.
[11] MILLER C W. Superiority of the h-index over the Impact Factor for Physics[EB/OL].[2916-10-16].https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0608183v1.pdf.
[12] HODGE D R, LACASSE J R. Evaluating journal quality:is the h-index a better measure than Impact Factors?[J]. Research on social work practice, 2010, 20(5):222-230.
[13] 姜春林.期刊h指数与影响因子之间关系的案例研究[J].科技进步与对策, 2007, 24(9):78-80.
[14] 马云彤.影响因子与h指数、复合影响因子相关性研究——以新闻出版和图书情报类期刊为样本[J].西安文理学院学报(自然科学版), 2013, 16(4):123-128.
[15] PRIEM J, TARABORELLI D.,GROTH P., et al. Altmetrics:a manifesto[EB/OL]/[2016-10-29]. http://altmetrics.org/manifesto.
[16] SEGLEN P O. Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research[J].BMJ clinical research, 1997, 314(7079):498-502.
[17] BARILAN J. Which h-index?——A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar[J]. Scientometrics, 2008, 74(2):257-271.
[18] 余厚强,邱均平.替代计量学视角下的在线科学交流新模式[J].图书情报工作, 2014(15):42-47.
[19] 邱均平, 余厚强.替代计量学的提出过程与研究进展[J]. 图书情报工作, 2013, 57(19):5-12.
[20] 邱均平, 余厚强.论推动替代计量学发展的若干基本问题[J]. 中国图书馆学报, 2015(1):4-15.
[21] 百道网.订阅期刊市场国模萎缩,新的学术文章评价方式正在取代影响因子[EB/OL].[2016-12-23]. http://www.bookdao.com/article/391318/.
[22] NAIK G. The quiet rise of the NIH's hot new metric[EB/OL].[2016-12-23].http://www.nature.com/news/the-quiet-rise-of-the-nih-s-hot-new-metric-1.20957.
[23] Altmetrics.org. Tools[EB/OL].[2016-12-24].http://altmetrics.org/tools/.
[24] ImpactStory[EB/OL].[2016-12-24].https://impactstory.org/.
[25] ScienceCard[EB/OL].[2016-12-24].http://sciencecard.org/.
[26] HUTCHINS B I, YUAN XIN, ANDERSON J M, et al. Relative citation ratio (RCR):A new metric that uses citation rates to measure influence at the article level[J/OL].[2016-12-24].http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1002541#authcontrib.
[27] NIH.iCite[EB/OL].[2016-12-24].https://icite.od.nih.gov/.
[28] PubPeer[EB/OL].[2016-12-24].https://pubpeer.com/about.
[29] 台湾国际信息整合联盟协会·李绍迪.PubPeer与开放、透明化的学术研究[EB/OL].[2016-12-24]. http://www.ifii.org.tw/focus_trend_login.php?num=358&utm_source=Library+Watch&utm_campaign=3fcc84100.
