[目的/意义]提出一种基于开放同行评议的学者影响力评价方法，即通过归纳收敛开放同行评议内容，形成能够表征学者不同层面影响力的多个标签簇，从而从质量层面多角度探索学者影响力，并验证所提方法的有效性。[方法/过程]调研分析国内外现有学者影响力评价方法，在此基础上，设计构建基于开放同行评议的学者影响力评价方法，并以开放同行评议平台F1000为例，进行实证研究和对比分析。[结果/结论]基于开放同行评议的学者评价方法是一种新的评价角度，实现了对学者的多角度评价，增加了学者影响力的饱满度和辨识度。分析表明，该方法与文献计量评价方法不具有显著相关性，可以作为对传统评价方法的一种补充。传统的定量分析与开放同行评议方法的结合将是未来学术评价的发展趋势。
[Purpose/significance] This paper designed and built an evaluation method of scholar influence based on open peer review.[Method/process] First the paper investigated the evaluation methods of scholar influence home and abroad. Then an evaluation method of scholar influence based on open peer review was designed and built. And Empirical research and comparative analysis were conducted.[Result/conclusion] The method of scholar evaluation based on open peer review is a new angle of evaluation, which achieves a multi-angle evaluation of scholars and increases the fullness and discernment of scholar influence. The analysis shows that there is no significant correlation between this method and the literature evaluation method, which can be used as a supplement to traditional evaluation methods. The combination of traditional quantitative analysis methods and open peer review methods will be the development trend of future academic evaluation.
[1] Open AIRE. Open AIRE survey on open peer review:attitudes and experience amongst editors. authors and reviewers[EB/OL].[2018-01-22]. https://zenodo.org/record/570864#.wzvrz49oloy.
[2] KRONICK D A. Peer review in 18th-century scientific journalism.[J]. Jama the journal of the American Medical Association, 1990, 263(10):1321-1322.
[3] 张海燕.基于文献计量学的洛特卡定律研究综述[J].中华医学图书情报杂志.2013,22(8):18-21.
[4] HIRSCH J. An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output[J].Proceedings of the National Academy Of Sciences,2005,102(46):16569-16572.
[5] EGGHE L.An improvement of the h-index:the g-index[J].ISSI newsletter,2006,2(1):8-9.
[6] ZHANG C T. The e-index, complementing the h-index for excess citation[J].PLoS ONE,2009,4(5):1-4.
[7] 孙海生, 韩红. AuthorRank引用认同用于科研人员评价的实证分析[J].情报杂志,2011, 30(7):30-33.
[8] 邓启平,王小梅.利用LeaderRank识别有影响力的作者[J].现代图书情报技术.2015,31(9):60-67.
[9] 寇晶晶. 中国学者影响力评价进展研究[J]. 情报探索, 2017,1(11):129-134.
[10] H-index and variants[EB/OL].[2017-08-22].http://sci2s.ugr.es/hindex.
[11] 马瑞敏, 韩小林. 基于特征因子算法改进的作者影响力评价研究[J]. 重庆大学学报(社会科学版), 2015, 21(2):106-109.
[12] MCCORMACK N. Peer review and legal publishing:what law librarians need to know about open, single-blind, and double blind reviewing[J]. Law library journal,2009,101(1):59-70.
[13] MULLIGAN A. Quality, certification and peer review[J].Information Services & Use,2008,28(3-4):197-214.
[14] SHOTTON D. The five stars of online journal articles-a framework for article evaluation[EB/OL].[2017-09-13]. http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january12/shotton/01shotton.html.
[15] PERAKAKIS P, TAYLOR M, MAZZA M, et al. Understanding the role of open peer review and dynamic academic articles[J]. Scientometrics, 2011, 88(2):669-673.
[16] 刘春丽.基于软同行评议的科学论文影响力评价方法——F1000因子[J].中国科技期刊研究, 2012,23(3):383-386.
[17] 姜春林,张立伟,刘学.中外同行评议研究现状及问题探讨[J].中国科技期刊研究,2015(3):163-166.
[18] FORD E. Defining and characterizing open peer review:a review of the literature[J]. Journal of scholarly publishing,2013,44(4):311-326.
[19] 宋丽萍,王建芳.基于F1000与WoS的同行评议与文献计量相关性研究[J].中国图书馆学报,2012(2):62-69.
[20] 沈小玲,徐勇,严卫中.基于网络文献计量的科技论文学术影响力综合评价研究[J].图书情报工作,2013, 57(21):95-103.
[21] F1000 Prime-faqs[EB/OL].[2017-08-22]. https://f1000.com/prime/about/faqs.
[22] F1000 Prime-classifications[EB/OL].[2017-08-22].https://f1000.com/prime/about/whatis/how.
[23] LOLLE S J, VICTOR J L, YOUNG J M, et al. Genome-wide non-mendelian inheritance of extra-genomic informationin arabidopsis[J]. Nature, 2005, 434(7032):505-509.
