The Journal of Culture Contents ISSN:2287-2256(Print) 2671-7026(Online) 문화콘텐츠연구

The recent excessive quantitative expansion of academic journals entails serious side effects such as simplicity and formality for resource management, which allows the evaluation system to be revised. Although the relevant issues are critical, there are few previous studies which can produce evaluation models and in-depth insight by systematic research design or empirical analysis. Against this backdrop, the present study systematically diagnoses the problems of evaluation criteria and evaluation methods for journals, and suggests appropriate ways to reform the evaluation system. The essence of journal evaluation is premised on the following two propositions: First, it requires autonomous control of the research milieu. Second, academia is in pursuit of qualitative improvement and accountability of research activities, which effectively guarantee research excellence and added value. Multiple regression results identify the number of annual publications, the period of registration, the number of paid members, and the KCI as the critical determinants of journal evaluation, which provide an opportunity to convert quantitative to qualitative one. If the goal of journal management is to increase competitiveness and trust by evaluating the quality of research, the standards based on the rationale that can reasonably determine whether these objectives are being substantially achieved are designed in detail for its own color.