2006
DOI: 10.1590/s1413-24782006000200013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: Mencionam-se as circunstâncias do ambiente acadêmico que envolvem a necessidade de avaliação de periódicos científicos. Propõe-se o desdobramento da qualidade dos periódicos em quatro dimensões, duas já consagradas (técnico-normativa, ou forma, e de finalidade, ou conteúdo) e duas novas (processo produtivo e de mercado). As quatro têm sua independência discutida, são conceituadas, discriminadas e exemplificadas, citando-se casos em que são empregadas na prática. Analisa-se também um instrumento de avaliação de… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0
22

Year Published

2012
2012
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(37 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
15
0
22
Order By: Relevance
“…After participating for various years on the Editing Advisory Group (GAE, discontinued in 2005) of the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) and also having spent some time on the Editorial Committee, I had come to focus on the quality of scientific journals and ideas regarding its four dimensions (technical-normative, product or content, productive process, and market) had been taking form. These ideas, which subsequently resulted in an article (Trzesniak, 2006), were laid out in this first meeting, in a more or less formal presentation (www.infocien.org/QualAval), which included discussing the Capes/Anpepp Evaluation Form (Yamamoto et al, 1999(Yamamoto et al, , 2002, which was, at the time, the "state of the art" reference for constructing the Qualis for areas that (i) viewed the participation of Brazilian journals as relevant in the respective flow of produced articles and (ii) were interested in strengthening and consolidating these journals.…”
Section: The First Formmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…After participating for various years on the Editing Advisory Group (GAE, discontinued in 2005) of the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) and also having spent some time on the Editorial Committee, I had come to focus on the quality of scientific journals and ideas regarding its four dimensions (technical-normative, product or content, productive process, and market) had been taking form. These ideas, which subsequently resulted in an article (Trzesniak, 2006), were laid out in this first meeting, in a more or less formal presentation (www.infocien.org/QualAval), which included discussing the Capes/Anpepp Evaluation Form (Yamamoto et al, 1999(Yamamoto et al, , 2002, which was, at the time, the "state of the art" reference for constructing the Qualis for areas that (i) viewed the participation of Brazilian journals as relevant in the respective flow of produced articles and (ii) were interested in strengthening and consolidating these journals.…”
Section: The First Formmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Both the survey and the impact factor belong to the market quality dimension (Trzesniak, 2006), however unlike the latter, the former aims to capture, explain, and formalize the subjective perceptions, latent in the community, that researchers have of the journals. These perceptions can be acquired by the respondents via the most varied means: hearing it said, colleague influence, journal marketing efforts, credibility of the publishing institution, scientific notoriety of the editor or of the members of the scientific body, reading a memorable article, and even occasionally (but only occasionally) via critical examination of some complete edition, that is, by means of an objective product evaluation.…”
Section: The Surveymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Todavia, a norma produtividade possui traços e produz efeitos contestáveis. Nos termos de Piotr Trzesniak (2006), ela possui traços técnico-normativos, estabelecendo critérios técnicos focalizados em produtos, e não no processo, estabelecendo uma norma à qual a academia deve se ajustar. Dentre os traços questionáveis, elegemos a periodicocracia por meio da Qualisficação para analisar a seguir.…”
Section: Norma Produtividade: Evidências No Sistema De Avaliação Da Cunclassified
“…The journals were rated and classified in accordance with their performance (varying from "Poor" to "Very Good"). Trzesniak (2006) suggests that the creation and development of the Qualis evaluation system, sustained by the Brazilian Federal Agency for the Support and Evaluation of Graduate Education (CAPES), made the process of assessing journals better known and respected by researchers in different fields. The Qualis evaluation system assesses the quality of journals and assigns them one of following classifications: A1 (highest), A2, B1, B2, B3, B4, B5 and C (lowest).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%