عنوان مقاله [English]
Purpose: The purpose of this research was to evaluate the websites of Iranian English-language journals classified by the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology and the Ministry of Health and Medical Education of Iran.
Design/Methodology/Approach: the methodology applied in this research was evaluation and the approach was webometrics. The research data was gathered through direct observation using a checklist containing 26 criteria. To develop the checklist, the quality features of scientific journals were derived from ISO standards and some other standards introduced here. The statistical population contains 81 websites of journals including 45 titles classified by the Ministry of Health and Medical Education and 36 other titles classified by the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology. Data analysis was done using descriptive statistics.
Findings: This research presents its findings in six categories: in the first category, the communication category, this research found that in most of the journals the communication is provided through email (with the highest frequency of 85%). In the second category, instructions to authors, the refereeing procedure has been only observed in 4% of the journals studied. It was also found that from the viewpoint of considering the details, the refereeing procedure is not the same in all cases, i.e. in some cases the refereeing procedure is brief and in some other cases it is more detailed. In the third category, access method, 74% of the journals studied possess a specific website which provides easy access to the information and more visibility. In the fourth category, the availability of contents, most of the journals present their archives and table of contents through the internet. Furthermore, 82% of the websites have provided access to the full text of their journal issues. In the fifth category, imprint of the journal, all the journals studied provide on their website: title, frequency, volume number and year of the current issue. In the sixth category, editorial board, most of the journals provide the name of their editor-in-chief and managing editor.
Conclusion: The websites studied have observed the quality standards to a good degree, in such a way that half of these criteria have been provided in most of the websites studied. Yet, data analysis shows that some of the criteria which play a major role in winning the audiences’ trust have been widely overlooked.