Quality versus quantity: contradictions in LIS journal publishing in China
Journal quality is typically assessed in quantitative terms. This IFLA-funded pilot project used strictly qualitative criteria to assess library and information science journal quality in China. The Chinese LIS journal publishing scene is described and its strengths and weaknesses examined. Five LIS journal editors were interviewed to gather their ideas about what makes for good journal quality, and what they wanted to achieve in their journals. Articles from their journals were scored on six criteria to determine the editor's success in achieving their stated objectives. Best scores were for "new information or data" and the worst were for "appropriate methodology and analysis".
No Reference information available - sign in for access.
No Citation information available - sign in for access.
No Supplementary Data.
No Article Media