Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes that the value of scientific research should be measured by academic contributions rather than the prestige of publication platforms, challenging the prevailing "top journal worship" mentality in the academic community [5][6][7]. Group 1: Nobel Prize and Research Value - Nobel Prize winners often face skepticism, yet their groundbreaking work can be recognized regardless of publication venue [3][6]. - The historical context shows that many Nobel-winning research papers were not published in top-tier journals, highlighting the importance of the research's impact over its publication platform [6][7]. - Experts advocate for a reform in academic evaluation systems to focus on originality and methodological breakthroughs rather than solely on publication metrics [7][8]. Group 2: Academic Journal Landscape in China - China's academic journals have proliferated, yet the capacity to publish high-quality international research remains insufficient compared to the demand [9][10]. - Data indicates that in 2023, Chinese authors published 728,700 papers in SCI journals, accounting for about one-third of global output, but only 33,400 were published in Chinese SCI journals [9][10]. - The need for a national-level publishing platform is emphasized to enhance the competitiveness of Chinese academic journals against major international publishers [10][11]. Group 3: Future Directions for Chinese Academic Journals - The National Natural Science Foundation of China mandates that at least 20% of papers from approved projects should be published in domestic journals [11]. - Developing domestic academic journals is seen as crucial for establishing the authority in defining and evaluating research value [11][12]. - There is a call for Chinese journals to focus on unique scientific issues relevant to China, promoting innovative and non-consensus research [12].