专家的评审意见对期刊稿件质量的评判尤为关键。在现行的三审制度下,编辑部与评审专家之间存在着信息不对称,表现为由于隐藏类型而造成的逆向选择,以及由于隐藏信息或隐藏行为而造成的道德风险。有效搭建专家与作者之间沟通的平台是一个较好地解决信息不对称的方法,可以作为提升审稿质量的积极举措。 Judges’ opinions on the evaluation of journal manuscripts are of particular importance. Under the current third trial system, there exists information asymmetry between the editorial department and accreditation experts, manifested as adverse selection due to hidden types and moral hazard due to hidden information or hidden behaviors. The effective platform for communication between experts and authors is a good way to deal with information asymmetry, which can be used as a positive measure to improve the quality of reviewers.