2002
DOI: 10.1590/s0100-19652002000200017
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Avaliação de periódicos científicos brasileiros da área da psicologia

Abstract: Palavras-chaveAvaliação; Periódicos; Psicologia. Evaluation of brazilian scientifc journals in psychology Abstract

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0
32

Year Published

2010
2010
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
3
0
32
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%
“…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%
“…To investigate the scientific production over a subject is relevant, because on watching the trajectory of its historical overview investigation tendencies are revealed and there is support for a research 27,28 . Pointing evidences that given condition existor certain results have been obtained is done through the biometric indicators 29 .…”
Section: Profile Of Productivity Grant Researchers In Speech Languagementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Tais pesquisas favorecerem o crescimento da produção, bem como aperfeiçoam publicações subsequentes [3][4][5][6] . Além disso, a indicação dos direcionamentos seguidos por uma área permite elaborar uma crítica interna sobre a produção, o que é considerado condição favorável para que o conhecimento incorporado por uma comunidade possa cumprir seu papel transformador [7][8][9] . Entre os veículos de divulgação do conhecimento na comunidade científica, os periódicos assumem lugar de destaque [10][11][12] .…”
Section: Descritoresunclassified