事实并非如此！

   我们选取了中英双语期刊作为样本，这种抽样思路来源于“双胞胎数据（twins data）”。双胞胎数据是劳动经济学领域常用的抽样方法，这种方法可以排除基因、受教育水平、经济水平等多种因素的干扰。比较中英双语期刊上的中文和英文论文，可以排除期刊水平（影响因子）、刊物主办单位、刊物编委会等因素对中英文论文的影响。然后，比较中文论文和英文论文分别在中文论文/英文论文中的影响力，也比较了这些中英文期刊在Scopus和Web of Science两个数据库中的不同表现。

   研究发现：（1）中文论文的影响力并不比英文论文低，原因在于，很多中国学者与华人学者在引用中文论文；（2）在Scopus数据库中，中国学者与华人学者这个群体的规模不容小觑，但在WoS数据库，这个群体的规模仍较小；（3）中文在国际学术数据库中的处境并不代表所有非英文的处境，例如，阿拉伯语论文的影响力显著低于阿英双语期刊上的英文论文。

   这项研究给我们的启发意义在于，我们中国办英语期刊的目的不应该是追求更高的影响因子与被引次数，而应该是为了提升国际可见度（国际对话与交流）。所以，当一个中文SCI期刊遇到影响因子的瓶颈时，刊发英文论文或转为英文期刊很难成为他的救星。

   论文发表在Journal of Informetrics（SSCI收录），这项研究获得ISTIC-ELSEVIER期刊评价中心资助。http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157714000844# 

附标题与摘要

Chinese-language articles are not biased in citations: Evidences from Chinese-English bilingual journals in Scopus and Web of Science

This paper examined the citation impact of Chinese- and English-language articles in Chinese-English bilingual journals indexed by Scopus and Web of Science (WoS). Two findings were obtained from comparative analysis: (1) Chinese-language articles were not biased in citations compared with English-language articles, since they received a large number of citations from Chinese scientists; (2) a Chinese-language community was found in Scopus, in which Chinese-language articles mainly received citations from Chinese-language articles, but it was not found in WoS whose coverage of Chinese-language articles is only one-tenth of Scopus. The findings suggest some implications for academic evaluation of journals including Chinese-language articles in Scopus and WoS.