Modelo-síntese para avaliação da qualidade dos periódicos científicos: indicadores extrínsecos e intrínsecos

Abstract

Technological developments made possible an expansion in the number of scientific journals in electronic format which, in turn, increased the need to create means to qualify these publications. To synthesize the diversity of criteria and quality indicators existing in methodologies for the evaluation of scientific journals since the 1960s was the central problem of this research study on the quality of scientific journals. The literature on the quality of scientific journals is divided into two streams: one analyzes the editorial process, considering the formal aspects of journal management and the other focuses on results, evaluating the impact level of an article in a specific scientific community. The present research developed an instrument that synthesized in a single model the extrinsic and intrinsic aspects presented (1) in the scientific literature about the quality of journals, (2) in the requirements for entry and permanence of scientific journals in the multidisciplinary databases and (3) in the parameters Web Qualis 2016 for the evaluation of scientific journals. It was a descriptive research, carried out in two phases: the first formalized a sythetic model based on the systematization of the criteria and indicators present in 23 studies of evaluation of journals, in the requirements of four multidisciplinary databases and in considerations present in the documents of the 49 areas of knowledge of Qualis 2016. In the second phase, the model was tested in a case study, with the periodicals Qualis A1 to B1 belonging to the Portal of Periodicals UFMG. Result of the case study, in which 23 scientific journals were analyzed, show that the journals studied are very timid in marketing actions and visibility of their publications, since on their homepages there was little disclosure of batabases where the journals were indexed and social networks to which the journals were members. It should be emphasized that the instrument developed in the study is useful for editors and editorial staff who can rely on this tool to improve their journals, focusing on parameters most demanded in evaluations of scientific publications.