2008
DOI: 10.1590/s1413-73722008000100003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Publicação e avaliação de periódicos científicos: paradoxos da avaliação qualis de psicologia

Abstract: RESUMO. A avaliação de periódicos Qualis para monitoramento dos programas de pós-graduação gerou grande repercussão na comunidade científica, suscitando questionamentos sobre o modelo. Nosso objetivo é fazer uma metaavaliação sobre esse processo de avaliação das revistas de Psicologia. Foram consultados editores de Psicologia (38 respondentes, questionário enviado por e-mail), bibliotecários envolvidos com avaliação de periódicos (5 participantes, entrevistas semi-estruturadas) e pesquisadores que participaram… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0
18

Year Published

2010
2010
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
7
0
18
Order By: Relevance
“…Considering the extensive discussion on the negative effect of excessive publication pressure (Castañon, 2004;Costa & Yamamoto, 2008;Macedo & Menandro, 1998), this result was unexpected because this factor was not reported as a frequent problem for the analyzed sample. Although the demand for productivity in and of itself has not been indicated as a reason for dissatisfaction, it should be considered that this demand is expressed within a substantially wider context of various elements that make professorial work difficult by interfering with the performance of professors, such as the lack of infrastructure, excessive bureaucracy, the need to teach large course loads, and the obligation to participate in frequent meetings.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 82%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Considering the extensive discussion on the negative effect of excessive publication pressure (Castañon, 2004;Costa & Yamamoto, 2008;Macedo & Menandro, 1998), this result was unexpected because this factor was not reported as a frequent problem for the analyzed sample. Although the demand for productivity in and of itself has not been indicated as a reason for dissatisfaction, it should be considered that this demand is expressed within a substantially wider context of various elements that make professorial work difficult by interfering with the performance of professors, such as the lack of infrastructure, excessive bureaucracy, the need to teach large course loads, and the obligation to participate in frequent meetings.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 82%
“…This increase in competitiveness has not necessarily resulted in an increase in the quality of scientific productions. Thus, the search for production quantity is occasionally prioritized over quality in terms of the innovativeness, relevance, and usefulness of the generated knowledge (Costa & Yamamoto, 2008).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nesse período, além de ter havido um crescimento no número de periódicos em Psicologia, também houve uma grande produção em virtude da criação de Programas de Pós-graduação e do incentivo à realização de pesquisas na área (Costa, 2006). além disso, é importante ressaltar que esse período coincide com o momento histórico de crítica e proposição de novas práticas profissionais para a Psicologia, e que, aliado a outros fatores, possibilita a inserção de psicólogos em campos de atuação não-tradicionais na profissão, além de fomentar, na academia, a discussão e produção de novos conhecimentos que se adequassem e refletissem as condições de vida da sociedade brasileira.…”
Section: Resultsunclassified
“…Several evaluation criteria have been developed by the Qualis Psychology Committee. Some of these criteria became obsolete, whereas others have been subjected to criticisms by Brazilian psychological journal editors (Costa & Yamamoto, 2008). An important aspect of these criteria is the fact that the Qualis Psychology Committee always performs an initial assessment to screen whether a journal is appropriately matched to the area of psychology.…”
Section: J Landeira-fernandez a Pedro De Mello Cruz And Dora Fix Vmentioning
confidence: 99%