IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v98y2014i1d10.1007_s11192-013-1034-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The selection of high-quality manuscripts

Author

Listed:
  • J. A. García

    (Universidad de Granada)

  • Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez

    (Universidad de Granada)

  • J. Fdez-Valdivia

    (Universidad de Granada)

Abstract

In addition to the factor of impact and other bibliometric indices, generation of a net profit year on year plays a central role in measuring overall journal publishing performance. However, some business models do not allow the academic journals continue to thrive since they are not financially sustainable. It raises a number of questions which have to be answered: how does the journal’s wealth grow given a particular allocation strategy of journal resources? What is the optimal allocating strategy of journal resources that maximizes the growth rate of journal’s wealth? What is the value of the side information for the selection of high-quality manuscripts? And, what is the effective growth rate of journal’s wealth if there exists dependence among successive selections of high quality manuscripts? This paper proves that information theoretic quantities like entropy and mutual information arise as the answers to these fundamental questions in the selection of high-quality manuscripts and allocation of journal’s wealth. Based on the uncovered relationships between the growth rate of journal’s wealth and the selection of high-quality manuscripts, we propose a number of basic guidelines for improving the journal publishing performance (e.g., match probabilities of high quality when placing the allocations of journal resources among the submitted manuscripts and focus on management practices that promote selection processes with less uncertainty of the outcome).

Suggested Citation

  • J. A. García & Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez & J. Fdez-Valdivia, 2014. "The selection of high-quality manuscripts," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 299-313, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:98:y:2014:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-013-1034-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-013-1034-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-013-1034-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-013-1034-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. J. A. García & Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez & J. Fdez-Valdivia, 2011. "Overall prestige of journals with ranking score above a given threshold," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 229-243, October.
    2. Kalaitzidakis, P. & Mamuneas, T.P. & Stengos, T., 2003. "Rankings of Academic Journals and Institutions," Working Papers 2003-8, University of Guelph, Department of Economics and Finance.
    3. Pantelis Kalaitzidakis & Theofanis P. Mamuneas & Thanasis Stengos, 2003. "Rankings of Academic Journals and Institutions in Economics," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(6), pages 1346-1366, December.
    4. González-Pereira, Borja & Guerrero-Bote, Vicente P. & Moya-Anegón, Félix, 2010. "A new approach to the metric of journals’ scientific prestige: The SJR indicator," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 379-391.
    5. J. A. García & Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez & J. Fdez-Valdivia & J. Martinez-Baena, 2012. "On first quartile journals which are not of highest impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(3), pages 925-943, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. J. A. García & Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez & J. Fdez-Valdivia, 2012. "A comparison of top economics departments in the US and EU on the basis of the multidimensional prestige of influential articles in 2010," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 681-698, December.
    2. J. A. García & Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez & J. Fdez-Valdivia, 2014. "How the same organizational structures can arise across seemingly unrelated domains of human activities: the example of academic publishing and stock market," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(2), pages 447-461, May.
    3. J. A. García & Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez & J. Fdez-Valdivia & J. Martinez-Baena, 2012. "On first quartile journals which are not of highest impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(3), pages 925-943, March.
    4. J. A. García & Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez & J. Fdez-Valdivia, 2011. "Overall prestige of journals with ranking score above a given threshold," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 229-243, October.
    5. Johannes König & David I. Stern & Richard S.J. Tol, 2022. "Confidence Intervals for Recursive Journal Impact Factors," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 22-038/III, Tinbergen Institute.
    6. Battistin, Erich & Ovidi, Marco, 2017. "Rising Stars," IZA Discussion Papers 11198, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Ham, John C. & Wright, Julian & Ye, Ziqiu, 2023. "Documenting and Explaining the Dramatic Rise of the New Society Journals in Economics," IZA Discussion Papers 16337, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Yves Fassin, 2021. "Does the Financial Times FT50 journal list select the best management and economics journals?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 5911-5943, July.
    9. Pantelis Kalaitzidakis & Theofanis P. Mamuneas & Thanasis Stengos, 2011. "An updated ranking of academic journals in economics," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 44(4), pages 1525-1538, November.
    10. Melody Lo & M. C. Sunny Wong & Franklin G. Mixon, 2008. "Ranking Economics Journals, Economics Departments, and Economists Using Teaching‐Focused Research Productivity," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 74(3), pages 894-906, January.
    11. David L. Anderson & John Tressler, 2013. "The Relevance of the “h-” and “g-” Index to Economics in the Context of A Nation-Wide Research Evaluation Scheme: The New Zealand Case," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 32(1), pages 81-94, March.
    12. Magnus Henrekson & Daniel Waldenström, 2011. "How Should Research Performance Be Measured? A Study Of Swedish Economists," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 79(6), pages 1139-1156, December.
    13. Chen, Jihui Susan & Liu, Qihong & Billger, Sherrilyn M., 2012. "Where Do New Ph.D. Economists Go? Evidence from Recent Initial Job Placements," IZA Discussion Papers 6990, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Marco Solazzi, 2010. "National research assessment exercises: a measure of the distortion of performance rankings when labor input is treated as uniform," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(3), pages 605-619, September.
    15. Timo Boppart & Kevin E. Staub, 2012. "Online accessibility of academic articles and the diversity of economics," ECON - Working Papers 075, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    16. Justus Haucap & Michael Mödl, 2013. "Zum Verhältnis von Spitzenforschung und Politikberatung: Eine empirische Analyse vor dem Hintergrund des Ökonomenstreits," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 14(3-4), pages 346-378, August.
    17. Justus Haucap & Johannes Muck, 2015. "What drives the relevance and reputation of economics journals? An update from a survey among economists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(3), pages 849-877, June.
    18. Stephen Bazen & Patrick Moyes, 2012. "Elitism and stochastic dominance," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 39(1), pages 207-251, June.
    19. Önder, Ali Sina & Schweitzer, Sascha & Yilmazkuday, Hakan, 2021. "Specialization, field distance, and quality in economists’ collaborations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    20. Jishnu Das & Quy-Toan Do, 2020. "US and them - The geography of academic research," Vox eBook Chapters, in: Sebastian Galliani & Ugo Panizza (ed.), Publishing and Measuring Success in Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 1, pages 111-114, Centre for Economic Policy Research.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:98:y:2014:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-013-1034-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.