This paper analyzes quantitative data of papers which were originally published by Chinese University Journals on humanities and social sciences, and reprinted by "Replicated Journals of Renmin University of China" from 2008-2011. It is found that this group of University Journals is in different levels, regional distribution of good journals is unbalanced, and gap between "National 211 Project University" Journals and "Non-national 211 Project University" ones is enlarged, etc. which mean the competitive environment for University Journals' "survival of the fittest" emerges. However, the quantity and the quality of University Journals don't directly lead to a contradiction; neither "to be diverse" nor "focus on a specific area" is the only reformational approach for University Journals to seek further development.