Journal evaluation systems: evolution and practices in Chinas social sciences

Abstract

Journal evaluation systems play an important role in academic evaluation. With many papers published in high-ranking journals, one can expect greater success in grant applications, higher internal resource allocations, faster promotions, and access to many other trappings of academic life. The expansion of China's research and development systems and its rise as a significant contributor to global innovation has seen journal evaluation become a significant and much-scrutinized issue. Thus, with this article, we offer a comprehensive analysis of the current state-of-the-art in journal evaluation systems and practices. The review begins with a history of social science journal evaluation in China. We then systematically compare the two most influential journal lists of the present day: the Chinese Social Sciences Citation Index (CSSCI) and the "Attraction, Management and Influence" Comprehensive Evaluation Report (AMI). A small selection of influential lists produced by universities, research institutions, and professional associations are also discussed. The material presented provides deep insights into how social sciences research in China is assessed. These findings may also reveal some information about the journal evaluation activities of other countries. Overall, our aim is to make a valuable contribution to the theory and practice of journal evaluation so as to promote the sustainable and healthy development of journal management and evaluation systems both in China and abroad.