人文與社會科學向來重視學術專書，但近年因研究評鑑大幅強調期刊論文，對人社學科的專書生產已經造成壓抑。本研究以深度訪談來了解14位有專書論著經驗的社會學學者對專書及研究評鑑的看法，包含專書對社會學的價值與貢獻、期刊導向的評鑑制度對社會學造成的影響、專書寫作可能遭遇的問題與困難，以及可能的改善之道。基於受訪者意見，本文也深入討論了專書寫作歷程考核與專書評鑑的本質性問題，期能作為未來評鑑制度改善之參考。

Scholarly books, or scholarly monographs, are an important form of research output in humanities and social sciences. However, the current research evaluation practices in Taiwan highly emphasize journal articles and have thereby suppressed the production of scholarly books. This study employed in-depth interviews with 14 Taiwanese sociologists who had written and published scholarly books to understand the problems and challenges facing scholarly monograph production in the contemporary research evaluation culture. Interview topics included the values and contributions of scholarly books to the studies of sociology, the negative influences of journal-focused research evaluations on the sociology discipline, problems and challenges facing book-writing sociologists, and possible solutions to those problems. Based on the findings, the authors discuss on the proposed research review approach that monitors an author’s book-writing progress rather than focusing on the end-product, as raised in the interviews, as well as the problems and reliability issues with the pre-publishing anonymous review requirement that has become a mandate for scholarly book publishing in Taiwan.

研究評鑑；學術專書；學術寫作與出版；台灣社會學

Research evaluation; Scholarly monographs; Scholarly writing and publishing; Sociology in Taiwan