scholarly journals Ranking Economics Journals, Economics Departments, and Economists Using Teaching‐Focused Research Productivity

2008 ◽  
Vol 74 (3) ◽  
pp. 894-906
Author(s):  
Melody Lo ◽  
M. C. Sunny Wong ◽  
Franklin G. Mixon
Author(s):  
Yolanda K. Kodrzycki ◽  
Pingkang Yu

AbstractWe develop a flexible, citations- and reference-intensity-adjusted ranking technique that allows a specified set of journals to be evaluated using a range of alternative criteria. We also distinguish between the influence of a journal and that of a journal article, with the latter concept arguably being more relevant for measuring research productivity. The list of top economics journals can (but does not necessarily) change noticeably when one examines citations in the social science and policy literatures, and when one measures citations on a per-article basis. The changes in rankings are due to the broad interest in applied microeconomics and economic development, to differences in citation norms and in the relative importance assigned to theoretical and empirical contributions, and to the lack of a systematic effect of journal size on influence per article. We also find that economics is comparatively self-contained but nevertheless draws knowledge from a range of other disciplines.


2009 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 352-363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sönke Albers

Abstract The attempts by Schulze and colleagues and Ritzberger to develop a joint ranking of journals for economics and business research are critically evaluated. Their lists suggest that the quality of top business journals is substantially lower than that of many economics journals. If, however, the authors of these lists do not want to claim a general superiority of one discipline (economics) over another one (business), they should give a clear indication that these lists are only applicable for economists. This warning appears to be necessary because Fabel and colleagues derive a ranking of universities and departments with respect to research productivity in business from the business research discriminating list RbR_IMP by Schulze and colleagues. While Diamantopoulos and Wagner already show a lack of face validity of these results, this article explains that the reason for this lies not only in the downgrading and also biased weighting of the business journals across subfields, but even more importantly, in a remarkable incompleteness of the database.


1989 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 735-736 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Miles Cox ◽  
Joseph P. Blount

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela A. Beiler ◽  
Lauren M. Zimmerman ◽  
Alexa J. Doerr ◽  
Malissa A. Clark

2012 ◽  
Vol 2 (5) ◽  
pp. 333-336
Author(s):  
P. Kanagavel P. Kanagavel ◽  
◽  
Dr. S. Gomathinayagam Dr. S. Gomathinayagam ◽  
Dr. S.Srinivasaragavan Dr. S.Srinivasaragavan ◽  
Dr. R.U. Ramasamy Dr. R.U. Ramasamy

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document