عنوان مقاله [English]
The worksheets used for evaluation of scientific journals are the most important evaluative tools for evaluating the quality of scientific articles. It seems that in addition to the specific features of research in this field and problems such as the extent of researchers' proficiency, especially in methodology and theoretical approaches; the indicators and evaluation criteria of the articles included in the worksheets of scientific-research journals of art will play an important role in influencing scientific reports in the field of art production in the country. The worksheets in scientific-research journals in the field of art, like other scientific journals, contain information that is used to review and evaluate scientific articles in the field prior to publication. Importantly, the components and indicators used in each of the evaluation worksheets of art-scientific journals are of varying quantity and quality. Therefore, the question arises: Are the indicators in the worksheets of the scientific-research works of art sufficient? Importance and necessity of this study is due to three reasons: 1) failure to conduct research similar to the present topic; 2) incomplete conformity of existing evaluation indices with the structure and scientific content of articles regarding the country’s science. In fact, the indicators of the quality assessment of scientific articles are the most important tools by which scientific journals present the value and credibility of researchers’ scientific reports.The purpose of this study, which was done through content analysis, is to describe the objective and qualitative features of the worksheets used for the evaluation of scientific research journals in art. On the basis of the census method, statistical samples consisted of nine worksheets for evaluating specialized art journals’ scientific research degree. Data collection was carried out using library research method and referring to scientific journals' citation databases. In order to extract the existing status of the evaluative criteria, a researcher-made checklist was created and Excel software was used as a research tool. The collected data were analyzed by descriptive statistics method in terms of frequency distribution and drawing tables and charts. The research findings show that from the total of 53 existing indicators, the index of "using sufficient and new valid sources (internal and external)" is the largest with 77.78% and the other 26 indicators, with 11.11%, have the lowest percentages. Of the 18 structural and conceptual components of scientific articles, 8 components are included in these worksheets. "Ethics" and "Writing principle" are two different components from among 18 components which can be seen in these worksheets. This suggests that the scientific journals in the arts-related fields, take into consideration the indicator of review articles rather than the indicators related to new knowledge production, which is the result of original research. Also, according to the data analysis, after the components of "title" and "discussion and conclusion", the components of "resources" and "abstract" with the same frequency (77.77%) and "introduction" and "findings" with a similar frequency (55.55%), respectively, have the second and third frequency among the evaluation components.The results indicate the unbalanced dispersion and distribution of components and evaluation indicators in the selected worksheets, as a consequence of which their revision is essential. The content analysis of these worksheets showed that there are significant imbalances and shortcomings in the dispersion and distribution of the components and indicators in the evaluation worksheets utilized for this group of scientific journals which in turn necessitates their revision. Regular and periodic evaluation of the review and assessment tools used for assessing scientific papers, identifying the shortcomings of the evaluation worksheets in the scientific art journals with the help of experts, and revising the existing indicators in the evaluation worksheets, based on the structural and conceptual components of writing scientific articles are among the most important activities suggested for such a revision. In addition to improving the quality of review, the revision will increase the researchers' satisfaction and confidence of the quality of evaluation and maximize the role and contribution of the arts-related research to the science production of the country. Obviously, this review, in addition to promoting the quality of arbitration, will increase the satisfaction and assurance of art scholars of the method and quality of arbitration, and the role and contribution of arts research to the production of national science.