英文摘要 |
This study re-evaluates psychology journals in Taiwan after Hsu (1998) and Wang (2003). The evaluated journals are Archives of Clinical Psychology, Bulletin of Educational Psychology, Chinese Journal of Guidance and Counseling, Chinese Journal of Psychology, Formosa Journal of Mental Health, Indigenous Psychological Research in Chinese Societies, Journal of Counseling & Guidance, Journal of Education & Psychology, Research in Applied Psychology, and The Journal of Guidance & Counseling. Evaluation is based on subjective indices and various types of objective citation indices obtained from the database constructed in this research. To form subjective indices, 6 experienced researchers, 12 journal editors, and 260 researchers and reviewers of these journals completed a questionnaire to report their opinions on academic quality, familiarity, and 5 characteristics of each journal. Considering variability of individual indices and consistency between indices, this study ranks the journals according to their average academic quality. Finally, this study classifies the 12 journals into 2 categories labeled “excellent” and “good,” which are derived from responses labels on academic quality from the questionnaire results. The study also shows researchers in different subfields differ in their opinions to journals. Results of the study should be interpreted with caution. The diversity of evaluations of subfields in psychology should not be ignored. Therefore, readers should judge journals according to the results in their subfield, and consider the characteristics of each journal. |