IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v51y2015icp11-23.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Towards a consolidation of worldwide journal rankings – A classification using random forests and aggregate rating via data envelopment analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Tüselmann, Heinz
  • Sinkovics, Rudolf R.
  • Pishchulov, Grigory

Abstract

The question of how to assess research outputs published in journals is now a global concern for academics. Numerous journal ratings and rankings exist, some featuring perceptual and peer-review-based journal ranks, some focusing on objective information related to citations, some using a combination of the two. This research consolidates existing journal rankings into an up-to-date and comprehensive list. Existing approaches to determining journal rankings are significantly advanced with the application of a new classification approach, ‘random forests’, and data envelopment analysis. As a result, a fresh look at a publication׳s place in the global research community is offered. While our approach is applicable to all management and business journals, we specifically exemplify the relative position of ‘operations research, management science, production and operations management’ journals within the broader management field, as well as within their own subject domain.

Suggested Citation

  • Tüselmann, Heinz & Sinkovics, Rudolf R. & Pishchulov, Grigory, 2015. "Towards a consolidation of worldwide journal rankings – A classification using random forests and aggregate rating via data envelopment analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 11-23.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:51:y:2015:i:c:p:11-23
    DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2014.08.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305048314000966
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. Abraham Diskin & Dan Felsenthal, 2007. "Individual rationality and bargaining," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 133(1), pages 25-29, October.
    2. Llamazares, Bonifacio & Pea, Teresa, 2009. "Preference aggregation and DEA: An analysis of the methods proposed to discriminate efficient candidates," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(2), pages 714-721, September.
    3. Liu, W.B. & Zhang, D.Q. & Meng, W. & Li, X.X. & Xu, F., 2011. "A study of DEA models without explicit inputs," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 472-480, October.
    4. George Emm Halkos & Nickolaos G. Tzeremes, 2011. "Measuring economic journals’ citation efficiency: a data envelopment analysis approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(3), pages 979-1001, September.
    5. Wang, Ying-Ming & Chin, Kwai-Sang, 2010. "Some alternative models for DEA cross-efficiency evaluation," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(1), pages 332-338, November.
    6. Moed, Henk F., 2010. "Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 265-277.
    7. Sönke Albers, 2009. "Misleading Rankings of Research in Business," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 10(3), pages 352-363, August.
    8. Meredith, Jack R. & Steward, Michelle D. & Lewis, Bruce R., 2011. "Knowledge dissemination in operations management: Published perceptions versus academic reality," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 435-446, August.
    9. Jones, M. J. & Brinn, T. & Pendlebury, M., 1996. "Journal evaluation methodologies: A balanced response," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 607-612, October.
    10. Lovell, C. A. Knox & Pastor, Jesus T., 1999. "Radial DEA models without inputs or without outputs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 118(1), pages 46-51, October.
    11. Günther G. Schulze & Susanne Warning & Christian Wiermann, 2008. "Zeitschriftenrankings für die Wirtschaftswissenschaften – Konstruktion eines umfassenden Metaindexes," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 9(3), pages 286-305, August.
    12. Bruno S. Frey & Katja Rost, 2010. "Do rankings reflect research quality?," Journal of Applied Economics, Universidad del CEMA, vol. 13, pages 1-38, May.
    13. Hapfelmeier, A. & Hothorn, T. & Ulm, K., 2012. "Recursive partitioning on incomplete data using surrogate decisions and multiple imputation," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(6), pages 1552-1565.
    14. Cook, Wade D. & Tone, Kaoru & Zhu, Joe, 2014. "Data envelopment analysis: Prior to choosing a model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 1-4.
    15. Bancroft, Diccon R. E. & Gopinath, C. & Kovacs, Agnes M. & Rejto, Lidia K., 1999. "A new methodology for aggregating tables: Summarizing journal quality data," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 311-319, May.
    16. Timothy Clark & Mike Wright, 2007. "Reviewing Journal Rankings and Revisiting Peer Reviews: Editorial Perspectives," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(4), pages 612-621, June.
    17. Cook, Wade D. & Doyle, John & Green, Rodney & Kress, Moshe, 1997. "Multiple criteria modelling and ordinal data: Evaluation in terms of subsets of criteria," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(3), pages 602-609, May.
    18. Liu, John S. & Lu, Louis Y.Y. & Lu, Wen-Min & Lin, Bruce J.Y., 2013. "Data envelopment analysis 1978–2010: A citation-based literature survey," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 3-15.
    19. Liu, John S. & Lu, Louis Y.Y. & Lu, Wen-Min & Lin, Bruce J.Y., 2013. "A survey of DEA applications," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 893-902.
    20. K S Park & I Jeong, 2011. "How to treat strict preference information in multicriteria decision analysis," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(10), pages 1771-1783, October.
    21. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    22. Hashimoto, Akihiro, 1997. "A ranked voting system using a DEA/AR exclusion model: A note," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 97(3), pages 600-604, March.
    23. Stefano Benati & Silvana Stefani, 2011. "The Academic Journal Ranking Problem: A Fuzzy-Clustering Approach," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 28(1), pages 7-20, April.
    24. Garry D. Bruton & Chung‐Ming Lau, 2008. "Asian Management Research: Status Today and Future Outlook," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(3), pages 636-659, May.
    25. Foroughi, A.A. & Tamiz, M., 2005. "An effective total ranking model for a ranked voting system," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 491-496, December.
    26. Theuβl, Stefan & Reutterer, Thomas & Hornik, Kurt, 2014. "How to derive consensus among various marketing journal rankings?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(5), pages 998-1006.
    27. Diskin, Abraham & Felsenthal, Dan S., 2007. "Individual rationality and bargaining," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 24233, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    28. Green, Rodney H. & Doyle, John R. & Cook, Wade D., 1996. "Preference voting and project ranking using DEA and cross-evaluation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 90(3), pages 461-472, May.
    29. Christopher Paul & William Mason & Daniel McCaffrey & Sarah Fox, 2008. "A cautionary case study of approaches to the treatment of missing data," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 17(3), pages 351-372, July.
    30. Frank L DuBois & David Reeb, 2000. "Ranking the International Business Journals," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 31(4), pages 689-704, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Merigó, José M. & Yang, Jian-Bo, 2017. "A bibliometric analysis of operations research and management science," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 37-48.
    2. Rosenthal, Edward C. & Weiss, Howard J., 2017. "A data envelopment analysis approach for ranking journals," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 135-147.
    3. Ryazanova, Olga & McNamara, Peter & Aguinis, Herman, 2017. "Research performance as a quality signal in international labor markets: Visibility of business schools worldwide through a global research performance system," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 52(6), pages 831-841.
    4. Li, Zongmin & Xu, Jiuping & Lev, Benjamin & Gang, Jun, 2015. "Multi-criteria group individual research output evaluation based on context-free grammar judgments with assessing attitude," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 57(PB), pages 282-293.
    5. Ghulam, Yaseen & Jaffry, Shabbar, 2015. "Efficiency and productivity of the cement industry: Pakistani experience of deregulation and privatisation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 101-115.
    6. Rialp, Alex & Merigó, José M. & Cancino, Christian A. & Urbano, David, 2019. "Twenty-five years (1992–2016) of the International Business Review: A bibliometric overview," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 1-1.
    7. Sahoo, Biresh K. & Singh, Ramadhar & Mishra, Bineet & Sankaran, Krithiga, 2017. "Research productivity in management schools of India during 1968-2015: A directional benefit-of-doubt model analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 66(PA), pages 118-139.

    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:eee:jomega:v:51:y:2015:i:c:p:11-23. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.