A multi-method evaluation of journals in the decision and management sciences by US academics
Numerous studies published in the academic literature address the issue of journal quality. However, little has been done to evaluate the broad set of journals pertinent to academic research in the decision and management sciences. This study examines the quality of such journals from a US point of view using both survey- and citation-based measures of journal quality. The survey-based measure is the perceived quality ratings assigned by US academics in the management science field. The citation-based measure is the impact factor, an indication of how often the articles in a journal are cited. This study finds that perceived quality ratings of the journals are positively correlated with citation impact factors. Also, both of these quality measures are found to be positively correlated with journal circulation and negatively correlated with acceptance rate. Journal quality ratings appear to vary across reviewers with different research interest areas and reviewers seem to rate journals higher if they have published in them.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 28 (2000)
Issue (Month): 1 (February)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Goh, C. H. & Holsapple, C. W. & Johnson, L. E. & Tanner, J., 1996. "An empirical assessment of influences on POM research," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 337-345, June.
- Arthur M. Diamond Jr., 1986. "What is a Citation Worth?," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 21(2), pages 200-215.
- Doyle, J. R. & Arthurs, A. J., 1995. "Judging the quality of research in business schools: The UK as a case study," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 257-270, June.
- Bush, Winston C & Hamelman, Paul W & Staaf, Robert J, 1974. "A Quality Index for Economic Journals," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 56(1), pages 123-25, February.
- Ederington, Louis H, 1979. "Aspects of the Production of Significant Financial Research," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 34(3), pages 777-86, June.
- Niemi, Albert W, Jr, 1987. " Institutional Contributions to the Leading Finance Journals, 1975 through 1986: A Note," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 42(5), pages 1389-97, December.
- Ormerod, R. J., 1997. "An observation on publication habits based on the analysis of MS/OR journals," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 599-603, October.
- Liebowitz, S J & Palmer, J P, 1984. "Assessing the Relative Impacts of Economic Journals," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 77-88, March.
- Jones, M. J. & Brinn, T. & Pendlebury, M., 1996. "Judging the quality of research in business schools: A comment from accounting," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 597-602, October.
- Mitchell, George, 1996. "Judging research quality and journals: A call for debate," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 613-613, October.
- Holsapple, CW & Johnson, LE & Manakyan, H & Tanner, J, 1994. "Business computing system research: Structuring the field," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 69-81, January.
- Doyle, J. R. & Arthurs, A. J. & Green, R. H. & McAulay, L. & Pitt, M. R. & Bottomley, P. A. & Evans, W., 1996. "The judge, the model of the judge, and the model of the judged as judge: Analyses of the UK 1992 research assessment exercise data for business and management studies," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 13-28, February.
- Eom, S. B., 1995. "Decision support systems research: Reference disciplines and a cumulative tradition," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 511-523, October.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:28:y:2000:i:1:p:17-36. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.