Faculty Perceptions and Readership Patterns of Finance Journals: A Global View

2005 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 223-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elisabeth Oltheten ◽  
Vasilis Theoharakis ◽  
Nickolaos G. Travlos
Keyword(s):  
Faculty Perceptions ◽  
Geographic Origin ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Research Quality ◽  
Journal Quality ◽  
Journal Rankings ◽  
Quality Perceptions ◽  
Global View

AbstractJournal rankings are frequently used as a measure of both journal and author research quality. Nonetheless, debates frequently arise because journal rankings do not take into account the underlying diversity of the finance research community. This study examines how factors such as a researcher's geographic origin, research interests, seniority, and journal affiliation influence journal quality perceptions and readership patterns. Based on a worldwide sample of 862 finance academics, we find remarkable consistency in the rankings of top journals. For the remaining journals, perception of journal quality differs depending on the researcher's geographic origin, research interests, seniority, and journal affiliation.

Usage of Journal Rankings: An International Perspective

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ervin L. Black ◽  
Lesley Stainbank ◽  
Dan Elnathan ◽  
Begoña Giner ◽  
Sidney J. Gray ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Small Groups ◽  
Task Force ◽  
International Perspective ◽  
Research Quality ◽  
Journal Ranking ◽  
Promotion And Tenure ◽  
Journal Rankings ◽  
Global Engagement ◽  
Faculty Research Productivity ◽  
Set Up

ABSTRACTEstablished by the Global Engagement Task Force, this committee was charged with examining the usage of journal rankings internationally. Through questionnaires, literature review, and discussions with various international accounting organizations we gain a better understanding of the uses and challenges of journal rankings. Journal rankings are used by governments, professional accounting bodies, university organizations, individual universities, schools, and departments to evaluate the quality and quantity of faculty research productivity. Rewards for journal publications differ around the world, but can range from promotion and tenure to monetary rewards. Publishing in a journal that is on a journal list does provide some weight or legitimacy to the publication and thereby assists in promoting the academic's career, yields monetary awards, or is in other ways beneficial to the academic. However, there is a danger in using a one-size-fits-all model. We caution strongly against using journal rankings to primarily assess the research quality of individuals or even small groups, because rankings are by design unsuited for this purpose. When journal rankings are used, they should be used in conjunction with other metrics. It is highly unlikely that a single solution with regard to the usage of journal ranking lists can be proposed. Rather, different accounting schools and/or departments need to set up their own guidelines as to how journal ranking lists can be used in decision making. The balance of the evidence suggests that journal ranking lists should be used with caution, and should not be used to assess individuals or small groups, or to assess research quality across disciplines.

scholarly journals Journal rankings and the ABS Journal Quality Guide

2009 ◽  
Vol 47 (9) ◽  
pp. 1441-1451 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huw Morris ◽  
Charles Harvey ◽  
Aidan Kelly
Keyword(s):  
Journal Quality ◽  
Journal Rankings

Physical Education Pedagogy Faculty Perceptions of Journal Quality

2014 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 134-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Silverman ◽  
Pamela Hodges Kulinna ◽  
Sharon R. Phillips
Keyword(s):  
Physical Education ◽  
Faculty Perceptions ◽  
Faculty Members ◽  
Scholarly Productivity ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Journal Quality ◽  
Publication Patterns ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Doctoral Institutions ◽  
E Mail

This study examined perceived journal quality by physical education pedagogy faculty members. Participants (N = 273) were identified in three ways and recruited through e-mail. Based on research in other fields investigating journal quality and on publication patterns in physical education, a web-based survey was used to examine (a) whether participants knew a journal and viewed it as scholarly, (b) ratings of journal quality, (c) what factors influenced their ratings, and (d) demographic and scholarly productivity measures. There was a wide range of journals known by the participants and clear indicators of which journals had higher and lower perceived quality. There were differences in ratings between those employed at master’s and doctoral institutions and relationships between scholarly productivity and the number of journals known. The results provide strong indications of journal quality for those who have reasons to evaluate journals in physical education.

scholarly journals Service action research: review and guidelines

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mattias Elg ◽  
Ida Gremyr ◽  
Árni Halldórsson ◽  
Andreas Wallo
Keyword(s):  
Action Research ◽  
Community Action ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Research Quality ◽  
Research Review ◽  
Service Research ◽  
Action Research Project ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Conducting Research

Purpose Conducting research that is both practice- and theory-relevant is important for the service research community. Action research can be a fruitful approach for service researchers studying the transformative role of service research and wanting to make contributions to both the research community and to practical development. By exploring the current use of action research in service research, this study aims to make suggestions for enhancing the contribution to theory and practice development and to propose criteria for research quality for action research in service research. Design/methodology/approach This study builds on a systematic literature review of the use of action research approaches in service research. Findings The study makes three main contributions. First, it posits that any action research project needs to consider the four elements of problem identification, theorization, creating guiding concepts and intervention. Second, based on these elements mirrored in service action research, it outlines and analyzes three approaches to action research (i.e. theory-enhancing, concept developing and practice-enhancing). Third, it suggests a move from instrumental to a more conceptual relevance of the research and elaborates on the criteria for research quality. Originality/value This study contributes to the understanding of how action research may be applied for conducting high-quality collaborative research in services and proposes measures to enhance research quality in action research projects focusing services.

scholarly journals Conceptualising quality in co-produced research

2020 ◽  
pp. 146879412091909
Author(s):  
Marilyn Howard ◽  
Helen Thomas-Hughes
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Production ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Research Quality ◽  
Policy Studies ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Process Outcomes ◽  
Key Dimensions

Co-produced research is said to create new knowledge through including the perspectives of those traditionally excluded from knowledge production, which in turn is expected to enhance research quality and impact. This article critically examines academic and UK voluntary sector literature concerning participatory and co-produced approaches to explore how quality is currently understood in co-produced research. Drawing on early career researchers’ experiences of a programme of co-produced research, the authors illustrate how theory and practice of co-production can differ, and the implications for conceptualising ‘research quality’ within co-produced research. Drawing on debates within qualitative research, community work and policy studies, the article outlines a potential framework for raising questions of ‘quality’, co-produced by research partners as part of the research process. Key dimensions of this framework are process, outcomes and autonomy.

scholarly journals Journal rankings and publication strategy

2021 ◽  
Vol 126 (4) ◽  
pp. 3227-3242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Piotr Śpiewanowski ◽  
Oleksandr Talavera
Keyword(s):  
Academic Work ◽  
Journal Ranking ◽  
Publication Strategy ◽  
Journal Quality ◽  
Journal Rankings ◽  
Ex Post ◽  
Ranking Systems ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Identification Strategy

AbstractWe study the impact of journal ranking systems on publication outlet choice. We investigate the publication behavior of UK-based scholars registered on IDEAS/RePEc and analyze the publication outcomes of their academic work uploaded to the repository. Our estimates suggest that authors strategically choose outlets to maximize their publication scores. Our identification strategy is based on exploiting the change in the British ABS journal ranking in 2015. Working papers written before the 2015 ABS journal ranking change are significantly less likely to be published in ex-post downgraded journals. The effect cannot be attributed to the overall change in journal quality.

scholarly journals Building the infrastructure to make science metrics more scientific

F1000Research ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 2897
Author(s):  
Jennifer Lin ◽  
Fiona L. Murphy ◽  
Mike Taylor ◽  
Liz Allen
Keyword(s):  
Research Community ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Rapid Expansion ◽  
Research Quality ◽  
Research Assessment ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Policy And Strategy ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Support Decision Making ◽  
Shed Light

Research leaders, policy makers and science strategists need evidence to support decision-making around research funding investment, policy and strategy.  In recent years there has been a rapid expansion in the data sources available that shed light onto aspects of research quality, excellence, use, re-use and attention, and engagement. This is at a time when the modes and routes to share and communicate research findings and data are also changing.  In this opinion piece, we outline a series of considerations and interventions that are needed to ensure that research metric development is accompanied by appropriate scrutiny and governance, to properly support the needs of research assessors and decision-makers, while securing the confidence of the research community. Key among these are: agreed ‘gold standards’ around datasets and methodologies; full transparency around the calculation and derivation of research-related indicators; and a strategy and roadmap to take the discipline of scientific indicators and research assessment to a more robust and sustainable place.

An Examination of Faculty Perceptions of Academic Journal Quality within Five Specialized Areas of Accounting Research

2006 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 219-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzanne Lowensohn ◽  
Donald P. Samelson
Keyword(s):  
Information Systems ◽  
Faculty Perceptions ◽  
Academic Journal ◽  
High Quality Research ◽  
Journal Quality ◽  
Promotion And Tenure ◽  
Accounting Research ◽  
Accounting Faculty ◽  
Academic Publications

In recent years, the research and publishing efforts of accounting academicians have become increasingly more specialized, as evidenced by the popularity of American Accounting Association (AAA) specialized sections and the increase in specialized academic publications (Herron and Hall 2004; Zeff 1996). Despite the trend, there is evidence that specialized areas are under-represented in the academic accounting journals typically regarded as top-tier (Bonner et al. 2006) and minimally considered in journal quality studies (Bean and Bernardi 2005). This study identifies topquality research publication outlets in five specialized areas of accounting research (behavioral, taxation, government and nonprofit, management accounting, and information systems), as perceived by accounting faculty familiar with these areas. We survey members of five AAA sections regarding journal quality and the effect of journal quality on promotion and tenure. We find that there are multiple outlets for high-quality research in specialized fields, but that many of these are relatively new and overlooked in prior studies. Also, the findings demonstrate that accounting academics in at least two specialized areas of accounting research (government and nonprofit, and information systems) may face difficulties substantiating the quality of their research.

A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis of Journal Rankings: The Case of Formal Lists

2000 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 839-861 ◽  
Author(s):  
David D. Van Fleet ◽  
Abagail McWilliams ◽  
Donald S. Siegel
Keyword(s):  
Human Capital ◽  
Career Development ◽  
Empirical Analysis ◽  
Faculty Members ◽  
Research Quality ◽  
Faculty Mobility ◽  
Journal Rankings ◽  
Department Size ◽  
Specific Human Capital

This study examines the use of formal rankings of journals by management departments for personnel decision purposes. We posit that the probability of adopting a list of formal rankings is related to a set of characteristics of the department. Few schools have formal lists of journals. Our empirical findings imply that the probability of adopting a list is positively correlated with department size and is inversely correlated with the perceived quality of the department. Considerable variation exists across such lists and across different institutions in the perceptions of the quality of journals. This suggests that, although lists may reduce the level of uncertainty regarding the assessment of research quality by providing explicit targets, lists may also induce faculty members to develop institution-specific human capital. This could reduce faculty mobility and impede career development.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document