阅读量：

234

作者：

林培锦

展开

摘要：

大学学术评价活动是大学学术活动的重要组成部分,同行评议作为一种由"内行人"来评判学术的制度设计,一直扮演着学术的"守门人"和"质量过滤器"的角色,在大学学术评价活动中处于不可或缺的关键性地位.然而,同行评议并非完美无缺,毫无破绽.事实上,它除了自身固有的制度性弊端之外,非制度性的缺陷也在现实中表现出来.其中,"利益冲突"问题便是同行评议非制度性缺陷的典型代表之一.利益冲突的存在,使得同行评议时时遭受指责与批判,抱怨与诟病,同行评议的公信力也因此受到影响,出现严重不足的现象.换言之,利益冲突问题必然影响到同行评议的客观性与公正性的实现,进而影响到整个大学学术活动的健康发展. 有鉴于此,本论文试图从利益冲突的视角,以内涵阐释——理论分析——实证研究——根源探讨——比较借鉴——治理构想为线索,对大学学术同行评议及其利益冲突的若干理论与实践问题进行了研究.论文主要由五部分组成: 其一,对大学学术同行评议及其利益冲突的产生与发展,本质与内涵以及其他相关的理论问题进行了研究与阐释.其中,不仅对于大学学术同行评议的本质及其存在基础进行了理论上的推导和较为详细的论述,同时,也提出了大学学术同行评议利益冲突的几种表现形态,从而为认识和理解大学学术同行评议及其利益冲突问题提供了坚实的基础. 其二,从理论分析和实证研究两个层面对大学学术同行评议利益冲突进行了研究.在理论分析层面,择取人性假设理论,委托代理理论和科学场域理论为分析的视角,分别对大学学术同行评议及利益冲突的产生进行各种理论的解读,并就相关理论下如何防范与规范利益冲突问题进行研究与分析.在实证研究层面,以大学教师为主要调查对象,运用质性访谈和问卷调查两种方式,从中透视大学教师们对于大学学术同行评议及其利益冲突问题的认识,态度,意见与建议.试图借此丰富对大学学术同行评议利益冲突问题的更为立体的认识. 其三,鉴于利益冲突的形成受到多种复杂因素的影响,并且为了更为深入地了解利益冲突的问题所在,本论文从社会,经济,文化以及制度四个方面来分析大学学术同行评议利益冲突产生的根源. 其四,为了进一步拓宽分析的视野,借鉴国际上其他国家和地区的优秀经验,本论文对美国的科研机构(NSF为例)项目申请评审和大学(耶鲁大学为例)教师聘任评议,香港科技大学教师职务晋升评审以及国际学术期刊投稿论文评审中同行评议的运行情况等进行介绍,并分别对各国及地区同行评议中的利益冲突防范措施及特点进行总结,归纳与分析,以利于我国进行科学的借鉴. 其五,在前文研究的基础上,提出了大学学术同行评议利益冲突治理的原则与治理策略.认为,治理不仅应营造良好的学术环境,更应在制度建设上下功夫.并且,从制度理论的视角,提出了正式制度和非正式制度的整体式构架.Academic evaluation activity is an important part of academic activities of university. Peer review as a system design of judging scholarship by "professionals", always play the role of "the gatekeeper" and "the mass filter" of the academic quality, and peer review stay an essential key position in the academic evaluation activities of university. However, peer review is not perfect and has no flaws. Actually, it has not only the inherent institutional defects, but also has the non-institutional defects which were reflected in reality. Among these defects, the problem of "conflict of interest" is one of the typical representatives of the non-institutional defects of peer review. Because of conflict of interest, peer review often suffers from accusations and criticism, complaints and denunciation. In addition, the public credibility of peer review showed a serious lack phenomenon resulted from conflict of interest. In other words, the objectivity and impartiality of peer review would be interfered by the conflict of interest, and then interfered with the healthy development of the academic activities of university. Consequently, under the perspective of conflict of interest, this article used one line to analyze the several practical and theoretical issues that emergence from the process of the academic peer review activities and the conflict of interest of university. The connotation of interpretation——the analysis of theory——the empirical studies——the exploration of the root causes of the conflict of interest——the comparison and reference——the tactics and ideas of reformation. This article consists of five parts. Firstly, this article make some analyses of the origin, development, quality, connotation and other theoretical issues of the academic peer review activities and the conflict of interest of university. Among these analyses, not only makes a theoretical derivation and enough discussion of the quality and existential foundation of the academic peer review of university, but also comes up with several kinds of the types of the conflict of interest. Therefore, it provides a solid foundation for the awareness and understanding of the academic peer review and its conflict of interest issues. Secondly, this article studies this issue that the conflicts of interest of university academic peer review from two levels of theoretical analysis and empirical research. Through the theory of Human Nature Assumption, Principal-agent theory, scientific field theory, this article makes an interpretation of the conflicts of interest of university academic peer review, and makes an analysis on issues of how to pervert and regulate conflicts of interest. In addition, this article uses two ways including qualitative interviews and questionnaires to investigate the teachers' opinions, attitudes, and suggestions for the issue of he conflicts of interest of university academic peer review. Thirdly, in view of the form

展开

年份：

2013