scholarly journals Ewolucyjna transformacja czasopisma. Część 8

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 21-28
Author(s):  
Michał Kokowski
Keyword(s):  
Journal Rankings

Naszkicowano ósmy etap rozwijania czasopisma Studia Historiae Scientiarum (wcześniejsza nazwa Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU). Podano m.in. informacje o ewaluacji czasopisma w „ICI Master Journal List 2019” (koniec 2020 r.), przez MEiN (9 lutego / 18 lutego 2021 r.), w Scopus (6 kwietnia 2021 r.) oraz w SCImago Journal Rankings 2020 (17 maja 2021 r.; dane dotyczące czasopisma są niezgodne ze stanem faktycznym: pominięto większość cytowalnych tekstów tomu z 2020 r., które są indeksowane w Scopus) oraz liczbie zagranicznych autorów i recenzentów bieżącego tomu czasopisma. Od tomu 21(2022) czasopismo Studia Historiae Scientiarum wdroży dodatkowe rozwiązania organizacyjne: licencję CC BY dla tekstów artykułów (zachowując możliwość innych licencji dla ilustracji), usługę CrossMark oraz opcję wydawniczą, tzw. „Artykuły FirstView”.

Using and Interpreting Journal Rankings: Introduction

2013 ◽  
Vol 123 (570) ◽  
pp. F199-F201 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Hudson ◽  
David N. Laband
Keyword(s):  
Journal Rankings

Comparing perceptions of the impact of journal rankings between fields

2021 ◽  
pp. 102381
Author(s):  
Chris Brooks ◽  
Lisa Schopohl ◽  
James T. Walker
Keyword(s):  
Journal Rankings ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals Publication Anxiety, Quality, and Journal Rankings: Researcher Views

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darryl Coulthard ◽  
Susan Keller
Keyword(s):  
Information Systems ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Research Performance ◽  
Journal Ranking ◽  
Journal Rankings ◽  
Ranking Systems ◽  
Published Research

Journal ranking systems are increasingly used to measure research performance of academics and universities. A growing number of academic commentators have voiced concerns of possible undesirable outcomes such as increased publication anxiety and an increase in safe and conforming research, but there have been few empirical studies on the possible effects. To address this gap, we surveyed Information Systems (IS) academics who published in one of three key IS conferences in 2013, to gather their views of the effects of journal ranking systems. Overall, we found that the concerns in the literature were strongly reflected in the views of those surveyed. Academics believe the system has greatly increased their publication anxiety. While most believed that the quality of published research had improved, researchers believe the ranking systems inhibit innovative, risky research, and encourages safe, conforming, mainstream research.

scholarly journals Nurturing Novelty: Toulmin's Greenhouse, Journal Rankings and Knowledge Evolution

2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 167-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas W.S. Renwick ◽  
Dermot Breslin ◽  
Ilfryn Price
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Evolution ◽  
Journal Rankings

scholarly journals An Update of the Vox Populi Approach to Academic Journal Rankings: 2011 in Review

2012 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
James E. Richard ◽  
◽  
Kim-Shyan Fam ◽  
Geoff Plimmer ◽  
Stephan Gerschewski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Academic Journal ◽  
Journal Rankings

A complementary examination of author characteristics of finance journals

2016 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 365-375 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kam C. Chan ◽  
Annie Wong ◽  
Hannah Wong
Keyword(s):  
Doctoral Programs ◽  
Doctoral Program ◽  
Journal Editor ◽  
Valuable Insight ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Journal Rankings ◽  
Final Sample ◽  
Accredited Schools ◽  
Important Publication ◽  
Acceptance Rates

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide a complementary analysis of finance journals that are often being overlooked in prior studies. Specifically, the authors examine the Australian Business Dean Council’s (ABDC’s) C-ranked journals in terms of their authors’ affiliations with US colleges, US colleges with Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) accreditations, and US colleges with AACSB doctoral program accreditations. Design/methodology/approach – A list of C-ranked journals is downloaded from the ABDC’s website. Full-text articles of these journals are downloaded from library databases for the five-year period of 2009-2013. Author affiliations are collected from the corresponding articles. Journal histories, journal editor locations, Cabell’s journal rankings, and acceptance rates are collected from the ABDC’s database, Cabell’s Directory, journal websites, and library databases. The final sample consists of 28 finance journals. Findings – The authors find that these journals have a substantial number and percentage of authors from US colleges. Among the US authors, about 92 percent of them are from AACSB accredited schools and most of them are from AACSB accredited schools with doctoral programs. The findings support the notion that these journals are important publication outlets for US researchers. The authors also find that journals with longer histories and US-based editors have a higher percentage of US authors. In addition, journals with better Cabell’s journal rankings and higher rejection rates have higher percentage of US authors from AACSB accredited schools with doctoral programs. Originality/value – C-ranked journals are often neglected in prior studies on journal characteristics because they are less well-known and less likely to be cited. However, these journals constitute as many as half of all finance journals in the ABDC database and can be important publication outlets for finance researchers. This study contributes to the literature by examining the author characteristics of these journals, namely, the proportions of authors who come from US colleges and authors who come from AACSB accredited US programs. Such an analysis will provide valuable insight into the value of these journals.

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 Use of the Journal Citation Reports for Serials Management in Research Libraries: An Investigation of the Effect of Self-Citation on Journal Rankings in Library and Information Science and Genetics

2000 ◽  
Vol 61 (3) ◽  
pp. 263-275 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Nisonger
Keyword(s):  
Information Science ◽  
Major Effect ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Citation Data ◽  
Research Libraries ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Journal Rankings ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Journal Citation

This article explores the use of the Institute for Scientific Information’s Journal Citation Reports (JCR) for journal management in academic libraries. The advantages and disadvantages to using JCR citation data for journal management are outlined, and a literature review summarizes reported uses of these data by libraries and scholars. This study researches the impact of journal self-citation on JCR rankings of library and information science (LIS) and genetics journals. The 1994 rankings by impact factor and total citations received were recalculated with journal self-citations removed; then the recalculated rankings were compared to the original rankings to analyze the effect of self-citations. It is concluded that librarians can use JCR data without correcting for journal self-citation, although self-citations do exert a major effect on the rankings for a small number of journals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document