"'帽子'一步赶不上，步步跟不上""有'帽子'的和没'帽子'的，科研资源差距可大了"……在一线采访 时，记者不时会听到科研工作者为各种"帽子"分心和焦虑的话语。大力排除这种干扰，对于优化科研环 境至关重要。 科学突破，源自锐意创新的精神，扎根于鼓励创新的土壤。"帽子"本是对科研水平、实绩的认可。 期待建立起更科学的科研人才评价体系，推动营造资源流动高效、人才竞争公平、创新活力迸发的健康 生态，让每一个有志向的科研人员都能守住初心，让每一份资源都能推动有价值的科学研究。 扭转这一局面，先要为"帽子热"降温。今年《政府工作报告》首次将"帽子"治理写入其中，提 出"深化人才分类评价改革和科教界'帽子'治理"，彰显遏制科研"逐帽风"的决心。国家自然科学基金委 员会取消了"杰青""优青"等说法，体现了淡化"帽子"的鲜明态度。各部门各地方也不断优化考核机制， 减少对人才称号的过度依赖。 【责任编辑：杨鑫宇】 立，则要针对不同岗位和学科特点，建立以创新价值和实际贡献为导向的科研评价与资源分配体 系。对基础研究、应用型研究，需要建立更精细的效果评价和长期跟踪机制。对于高校院所的教师，也 可以分为科研型、教学型和教学科研型，形 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the need to reform the current scientific evaluation system that overly relies on academic titles, referred to as "hats," to create a more conducive research environment and promote genuine innovation [1][2][3]. Group 1: Issues with Current Evaluation System - The term "hats" refers to various talent plans and academic titles in the scientific field, which significantly influence the allocation of research resources [1]. - There is a prevalent issue where the focus on "hats" leads to disparities in resource distribution, affecting recruitment, awards, and treatment of researchers [1][2]. - The current system fosters a culture of immediate results and distorts the true value of scientific research, leading to anxiety among researchers [1][2]. Group 2: Proposed Reforms - The government has recognized the need to address the "hat fever" by including "hat governance" in the annual work report, indicating a commitment to reform [2]. - The National Natural Science Foundation has eliminated terms like "杰青" and "优青," reflecting a clear stance on diminishing the emphasis on "hats" [2]. - Institutions like Tsinghua University are implementing initiatives that support research based on individual merit rather than titles, allowing researchers to focus on their work [2][3]. Group 3: New Evaluation Framework - A new evaluation system should be established that is tailored to different roles and disciplines, focusing on innovation value and actual contributions [2][3]. - The proposed system aims to move away from a one-size-fits-all approach to a more diversified evaluation standard that ensures scientific rigor, operability, and fairness [3]. - The introduction of peer review and clear definitions of significant contributions is essential to mitigate biases and enhance the credibility of the evaluation process [3].