Welcome to the InfoSci Platform
Reference Hub6
Journal Rankings: Comparing Reputation, Citation and Acceptance Rates

Journal Rankings: Comparing Reputation, Citation and Acceptance Rates

E. Susanna Cahn
Copyright: © 2014 |Volume: 6 |Issue: 4 |Pages: 12
ISSN: 1935-5688|EISSN: 1935-5696|EISBN13: 9781466655140|DOI: 10.4018/ijisss.2014100106
Cite Article Cite Article

MLA

Cahn, E. Susanna. "Journal Rankings: Comparing Reputation, Citation and Acceptance Rates." IJISSS vol.6, no.4 2014: pp.92-103. http://doi.org/10.4018/ijisss.2014100106

APA

Cahn, E. S. (2014). Journal Rankings: Comparing Reputation, Citation and Acceptance Rates. International Journal of Information Systems in the Service Sector (IJISSS), 6(4), 92-103. http://doi.org/10.4018/ijisss.2014100106

Chicago

Cahn, E. Susanna. "Journal Rankings: Comparing Reputation, Citation and Acceptance Rates," International Journal of Information Systems in the Service Sector (IJISSS) 6, no.4: 92-103. http://doi.org/10.4018/ijisss.2014100106

Export Reference

Mendeley
Favorite Full-Issue Download

Abstract

Research productivity is important in school reputation as well as individual faculty evaluation. In order to evaluate research productivity, the quality of research is often measured by proxy through the number of journal articles and ratings of the journals in which they appear. Because of this there is significant pressure on faculty to publish in the “top journals”. There are several metrics for evaluating and ranking journals, each of them with its own merits and limitations. Some commonly used quantitative measures of research quality are citation analyses, acceptance rates, and whether or not a journal is peer reviewed. Alternatively, journals can be ranked qualitatively into stratified groups based on reputation. Reputation, in turn, may be correlated with perceived values of quantitative measures, and thus is more subjective. The purpose of this research is to examine the extent of correlation between various measures of journal quality, in particular between quantitative and qualitative measures. The various measures are compared to examine the extent to which they are similar. Comparisons were also made among business departments. For this sample, overall journal rank was correlated with citation rate but not with acceptance rate. However, quantitative measures were not consistent among academic departments, indicating that journal rank can not be reliably used to make interdepartmental comparisons.

Request Access

You do not own this content. Please login to recommend this title to your institution's librarian or purchase it from the IGI Global bookstore.