IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Quantitative and Qualitative Rankings of Scholars

  • Katja Rost
  • Bruno S. Frey

In a former article we started to argue that publication and citation rankings of individual scholars do not effectively measure research quality, which should in fact be the essence of evaluation (Frey and Rost (2010)). For the field of economics we show that an alternative ranking based on membership on academic editorial boards of professional journals is randomly correlated with citation and publication rankings of these scholars. In this article we go a step further by hypothesizing a systematic, inverted U-shaped relationship between quantitative and qualitative rankings. By relying on a longitudinal data set of management scholars who are part of the international topcommunity in organization science the findings support this multi-tasking effect. While a certain amount of publications indeed reflects aspects of research quality, it also suggests that maximizing publications ignores other essential aspects of research quality that are doubtlessly hard to measure. It follows that if career decisions are only based on high scores in publication rankings the result will be not only haphazard but may be even counterproductive for science.

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.

File URL: http://www.vhb.de/sbr/pdfarchive.html
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by LMU Munich School of Management in its journal Schmalenbach Business Review.

Volume (Year): 63 (2011)
Issue (Month): 1 (January)
Pages: 63-91

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:sbr:abstra:v:63:y:2011:i:1:p:63-91
Contact details of provider: Postal: Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1, 80539 Muenchen
Phone: 0049 89 2180 2166
Fax: 0049 89 2180 6327
Web page: http://www.sbr-online.com

More information through EDIRC

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.:

as in new window
  1. Bruno S. Frey & Katja Rost, 2008. "Do Rankings Reflect Research Quality?," CESifo Working Paper Series 2443, CESifo Group Munich.
  2. 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.
  3. Chamley, Christophe & Gale, Douglas, 1994. "Information Revelation and Strategic Delay in a Model of Investment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(5), pages 1065-85, September.
  4. Paul Nightingale & Alister Scott, 2007. "Peer review and the relevance gap: Ten suggestions for policy-makers," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(8), pages 543-553, October.
  5. Ulf Schrader & Thorsten Hennig-Thurau, 2009. "VHB-JOURQUAL2: Method, Results, and Implications of the German Academic Association for Business Research's Journal Ranking," BuR - Business Research, German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 2(2), pages 180-204, December.
  6. Melody Lo & M.C. Sunny Wong & Franklin G. Mixon Jr, 2008. "Ranking Economics Journals, Economics Departments, and Economists Using Teaching-Focused Research Productivity," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 74(3), pages 894-906, January.
  7. Nelson, Richard R., 2004. "The market economy, and the scientific commons," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 455-471, April.
  8. Kaufman, George G, 1984. " Rankings of Finance Departments by Faculty Representation on Editorial Boards of Professional Journals: A Note," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 39(4), pages 1189-97, September.
  9. Moed, H. F. & Burger, W. J. M. & Frankfort, J. G. & Van Raan, A. F. J., 1985. "The use of bibliometric data for the measurement of university research performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 131-149, June.
  10. Johnes, Geraint, 1988. "Determinants of research output in economics departments in British universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 171-178, June.
  11. Starbuck, William H., 2009. "The constant causes of never-ending faddishness in the behavioral and social sciences," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 108-116, March.
  12. Clive Beed & Cara Beed, 1996. "Measuring the Quality of Academic Journals: The Case of Economics," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, M.E. Sharpe, Inc., vol. 18(3), pages 369-396, April.
  13. Rigby, J. & Edler, J., 2005. "Peering inside research networks: Some observations on the effect of the intensity of collaboration on the variability of research quality," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 784-794, August.
  14. Tom Coupé, 2003. "Revealed Performances: Worldwide Rankings of Economists and Economics Departments, 1990-2000," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(6), pages 1309-1345, December.
  15. Joao Ricardo Faria, 2000. "The Game Academics Play: Editors Versus Authors," Working Paper Series 105, Finance Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney.
  16. Bell, John G & Seater, John J, 1978. "Publishing Performance: Departmental and Individual," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 16(4), pages 599-615, October.
  17. Partha, Dasgupta & David, Paul A., 1994. "Toward a new economics of science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 487-521, September.
  18. Alberto Baccini & Lucio Barabesi, 2008. "Interlocking Editorship. A Network Analysis of the Links Between Economic Journals," Department of Economics University of Siena 532, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
  19. Frey, Bruno S, 2003. " Publishing as Prostitution?--Choosing between One's Own Ideas and Academic Success," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 116(1-2), pages 205-23, July.
  20. Michael Bräuninger & Justus Haucap, 2003. "Reputation and Relevance of Economics Journals," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(2), pages 175-197, 05.
  21. Laband, David N & Piette, Michael J, 1994. "The Relative Impacts of Economics Journals: 1970-1990," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 32(2), pages 640-66, June.
  22. Oliver Fabel & Miriam Hein & Robert Hofmeister, 2008. "Research Productivity in Business Economics: An Investigation of Austrian, German and Swiss Universities," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 9, pages 506-531, November.
  23. Coats, A W, 1971. "The Role of Scholarly Journals in the History of Economics: An Essay," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 9(1), pages 29-44, March.
  24. Arthur M. Diamond Jr., 1986. "What is a Citation Worth?," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 21(2), pages 200-215.
  25. Sushil Bikhchandani & David Hirshleifer & Ivo Welch, 2010. "A theory of Fads, Fashion, Custom and cultural change as informational Cascades," Levine's Working Paper Archive 1193, David K. Levine.
  26. Butler, Linda, 2003. "Explaining Australia's increased share of ISI publications--the effects of a funding formula based on publication counts," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 143-155, January.
  27. Robert Hofmeister & Heinrich W. Ursprung, 2008. "Das Handelsblatt Ökonomen-Ranking 2007: Eine kritische Beurteilung," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 9(3), pages 254-266, 08.
  28. Canice Prendergast, 1999. "The Provision of Incentives in Firms," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 37(1), pages 7-63, March.
  29. Banerjee, Abhijit V, 1992. "A Simple Model of Herd Behavior," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 107(3), pages 797-817, August.
  30. Nederhof, A. J. & van Raan, A. F. J., 1993. "A bibliometric analysis of six economics research groups: A comparison with peer review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 353-368, August.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sbr:abstra:v:63:y:2011:i:1:p:63-91. 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: (sbr)

The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask sbr to update the entry or send us the correct address

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.