科研管理
科研管理
과연관리
Science Research Management
2007年
5期
163~169
,共null页
科研申请评价 同行参考标准 类棋局试验
科研申請評價 同行參攷標準 類棋跼試驗
과연신청평개 동행삼고표준 류기국시험
research application evaluation; peer reference standard; homothetic chess game experiment
本文通过一个准试验研究,验证了以第三层次学科目录作为划分同行标准的相对有效性;并比较分析了以此标准划分的同行和非同行对自然科学类和人文社科类科研申请评价效果的差异;研究还验证了源于"棋局试验"的系统优劣评判思想并不适宜于科研申请评价,进一步证明了专业性同行在科研申请评价中的关键角色。
本文通過一箇準試驗研究,驗證瞭以第三層次學科目錄作為劃分同行標準的相對有效性;併比較分析瞭以此標準劃分的同行和非同行對自然科學類和人文社科類科研申請評價效果的差異;研究還驗證瞭源于"棋跼試驗"的繫統優劣評判思想併不適宜于科研申請評價,進一步證明瞭專業性同行在科研申請評價中的關鍵角色。
본문통과일개준시험연구,험증료이제삼층차학과목록작위화분동행표준적상대유효성;병비교분석료이차표준화분적동행화비동행대자연과학류화인문사과류과연신청평개효과적차이;연구환험증료원우"기국시험"적계통우렬평판사상병불괄의우과연신청평개,진일보증명료전업성동행재과연신청평개중적관건각색。
Through a quasi - standard experiment,it is confirmed that the third level discipline catalogue should become the reference standard to distinguish peers from non - peers. Furthermore, the research application evaluation difference made by peers and non -peers who are defined with this reference standard between natural science and humanity, social science is analyzed comparatively. The test results about the hypothesis originated from "chess game experiment" indicate that the idea about evaluating system design quality dose not suitable for the research application evaluation, and further prove that the peers play the key role in the guarantee of evaluation effectiveness.