Journal Prestige Research Articles

Management research topics: Positioning, evolution, alignment with teaching and with job market needs

Management education and research have at least three constituencies: faculty members, the students they teach, and the businesses that hire them. We look at how the research topics published have evolved, and whether they differ by the prestige of the publication. We then assess whether research topics align with teaching and whether research and teaching align with job market needs.This study focuses on the management sub-discipline of Operations Management (OM), where our backgrounds best allow us to interpret results. However, our approach could apply across most disciplines within management.We use bibliometric analysis to track the evolution of research keywords within academic journals. This allows us to track themes, their interaction, and whether their relative popularity varies over time and with journal prestige and ranking.Many studies have found that work published in top-tier journals tends to be more focused on theory and less applied than less elite journals.We then compare the top research topics found to syllabi from a sample of core course offerings in academic business programs to track whether these themes are being taught. We then assess how frequently these top research themes and course topics appear to be sought in the job market.

Reflections on theJournal of the Society for Social Work and Research

Reflections on the<i>Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research</i>

Who Writes about Archaeology? An Intersectional Study of Authorship in Archaeological Journals

Since the 1980s, activist archaeologists have used quantitative studies of journal authorship to show that the demographics of archaeological knowledge production are homogeneous. This literature, however, focuses almost exclusively on the gender of archaeologists, without deeply engaging with other forms of identity or adequately addressing the methodological limitations of assigning binary gender identifications based on first names. This paper rectifies these limitations through an intersectional study of inequities in academic archaeological publications by presenting the results of a survey of authors who published in 21 archaeology journals over a 10-year period (2007–2016). This survey asked them to provide their self-identifications in terms of gender, race/ethnicity, and sexual orientation. The results demonstrate that although there has been an influx of women archaeologists in recent decades, we have not yet reached gender parity. They also show that because many women archaeologists are cisgender, white, and heterosexual, the discipline's knowledge producers remain relatively homogeneous. Furthermore, although there is demographic variation between journals, there is a strong correlation between journal prestige and the percentage of authors who are straight, white, cisgender men. This intersectional study of journal authorship demographics provides a comprehensive perspective on issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion in the discipline of archaeology.

Prestige and relevance of the scholarly journals: Impressions of SIOP members

AbstractPrestigious journals are widely admired for publishing quality scholarship, yet the primary indicators of journal prestige (i.e., impact factors) do not directly assess audience admiration. Moreover, the publication landscape has changed substantially in the last 20 years, with electronic publishing changing the way we consume scientific research. Given that it has been 18 years since the publication of the last journal prestige survey of SIOP members, the authors conducted a new survey and used these results to reflect on changing practices within industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology. SIOP members (n = 557) rated the prestige and relevance of I-O and management journals. Responses were analyzed according to job setting, and were compared to a survey conducted by Zickar and Highhouse (2001) in 2000. There was considerable consistency in prestige ratings across settings (i.e., management department vs. psychology department; academic vs. applied), especially among the top journals. There was considerable variance, however, in the perceived usefulness of different journals. Results also suggested considerable consistency across the two time periods, but with some increases in prestige among OB-oriented journals. Changes in the journal landscape are discussed, including the rise of OHP as a topic of concentration in I-O. We suggest that I-O programs will continue to attract the top researchers in talent management and OHP, which should result in the use of a broader set of journals for judging I-O program impact.

Evaluation and treatment of groin pain syndromes in athletes

Groin pain syndromes, commonly referred to as sports hernias, are pathologic conditions which are not commonly well understood by those treating athletes despite making up approximately 6% of athletic injuries. The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive understanding and consistent nomenclature for appropriate identification and treatment of this relatively common condition. A computerized database search was conducted up to June 2019 and pertinent articles were cited using the terms sports hernia, athletic pubalgia, and groin pain. The quality and validity of the evidence was assessed based on journal prestige and impact factor as well as consistency with the other reviewed literature. The reviewed literature was inconsistent in terms of terminology. Few comprehensive reviews exist combining intra- and extra-articular causes of groin pain syndromes in athletes. Further, little orthopedic literature exists regarding pathologic inguinal and abdominal wall conditions. Groin pain syndromes refers to inguinal pain where the pathology is not caused by disturbances in the intra-articular hip joint, however, concomitant pathology in both locations are common. It is thought to be associated with a number of factors, including imbalances in abdominal and hip adductor strength, deficits in hip range of motion, poor tissue extensibility, and high intensity or high repetition hip adductor muscle shearing. The history and physical exam remain central to the appropriate diagnosis. Diagnostic imaging modalities such as MRI, CT, and diagnostic ultrasound are recommended due to difficulty of diagnosis based on physical exam alone. Non-operative treatment should first be attempted with surgical intervention yielding good outcomes in those that require it.

Why we publish where we do: Faculty publishing values and their relationship to review, promotion and tenure expectations.

Using an online survey of academics at 55 randomly selected institutions across the US and Canada, we explore priorities for publishing decisions and their perceived importance within review, promotion, and tenure (RPT). We find that respondents most value journal readership, while they believe their peers most value prestige and related metrics such as impact factor when submitting their work for publication. Respondents indicated that total number of publications, number of publications per year, and journal name recognition were the most valued factors in RPT. Older and tenured respondents (most likely to serve on RPT committees) were less likely to value journal prestige and metrics for publishing, while untenured respondents were more likely to value these factors. These results suggest disconnects between what academics value versus what they think their peers value, and between the importance of journal prestige and metrics for tenured versus untenured faculty in publishing and RPT perceptions.

Publishing habits and perceptions of open access publishing and public access amongst clinical and research fellows.

IntroductionOpen access (OA) publishing rates have risen dramatically in the biomedical sciences in the past decade. However, few studies have focused on the publishing activities and attitudes of early career researchers. The aim of this study was to examine current publishing activities of clinical and research fellows and their perceptions of OA publishing and public access.MethodsThis study employed a mixed methods approach. Data on publications authored by Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center fellows between 2013 and 2018 were collected via an in-house author profile system and citation indexes. Journals were categorized according to SHERPA/RoMEO classifications. In-person and telephone interviews were conducted with fifteen fellows to discern their perceptions of OA publishing.ResultsThe total percentage of fellows’ publications that were freely available OA was 28.6%, with a relatively flat rate between 2013 and 2018. Publications with fellows as first authors were significantly more likely to be OA. Fellows cited high article processing charges (APCs) and perceived lack of journal quality or prestige as barriers to OA publishing. Fellows generally expressed support for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) public access policy.ConclusionsWhile the fellows in this study acknowledged the potential of OA to aid in research dissemination, they also expressed hesitation to publish OA related to confusion surrounding legitimate OA and predatory publications and frustration with APCs. Fellows supported the NIH public access policy and accepted it as part of their research process. Health sciences information professionals could potentially leverage this acceptance of public access to advocate for OA publishing.

Российские лингвисты: наукометрическое ранжирование

The article deals with scientometric analysis of publications by 40 wide-known Russian linguists. The linguists are ranked by h-index, the number of publications and citations according to the data of Russian Science Citation Index. This research examines the factors affecting h-index and citation rates: involvement in leading research areas, carrying out scientific inquiries in top universities and academic research institutes, high prestige of relevant journals and publishers, and publishing textbooks and monographs. The s-index (self-citation index) is proposed as an additional scienometric measuring of individual's publication record. The s-index is computed by taking the ratio of h-index to h-index calculated without self-citations. It is concluded that scientometric analysis of h-index and s-index can be one of the objective tools for evaluation of scholars. At the same time, the methods of scientometrics need to be improved, including better coordination of national databases and global scientometric sources (Scopus, Web of Science, etc.). A promising area of applied scientometrics is the use of expert assessments made by qualified specialists in the relevant field of knowledge and the expansion of evaluation parameters.

Contemporary Russian linguists: bibliometric analysis of publication activity and citation rate

Objective assessment of the results of scientific work, including the possibility of using the bibliometric (statistical, mathematical) assessment of publication activity, citation and, ultimately, the prestige of scholars, has been the subject of wide speculation in recent decades. The article presents the materials of a bibliometric analysis of publication activity and citation of well-known modern linguists, based on data from the Russian Science Citation Index. The article deals with bibliometric analysis of publication activity and citation rate of 25 contemporary Russian linguists according to the Russian Science Citation Index. The paper touches upon the ranking of Russian linguists by the number of publications and citations. This research examines the factors affecting citation rates: high prestige of relevant journals and publishers, involvement in leading research areas, carrying out scientific inquiries in top universities and academic research institutes.

Assessing the Quality and Prestige of Disciplinary Social Work Journals: A National Study of Faculty Perceptions

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to (1) evaluate the overall quality and prestige of all currently active disciplinary social work periodicals and (2) determine whether perceptions of quality among the top 10 journals varied by age, gender, race/ethnicity, and academic rank. Method: To perform this cross-sectional study, we used a national sample of tenure-track faculty ( N = 307) affiliated with PhD granting social work programs. Results: Journals ( N = 64) were rank ordered based upon perceptions of overall quality and prestige. Analysis revealed overall quality and prestige scores were highly correlated ( rs = .93, p &lt; .001). Race/ethnicity was unrelated to perceptions of quality among top-tier journals, but age, gender, and academic rank were significantly associated with perceptions of quality in some cases, although the effect sizes were relatively small. Discussion: The results provide guidance for faculty seeking to disseminate their work in highly regarded disciplinary periodicals, especially junior faculty seeking tenure and promotion.

Journal editors’ perspectives on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in biomedical journals: a qualitative study

ObjectivePeer reviewers of biomedical journals are expected to perform a large number of roles and tasks, some of which are seemingly contradictory or demonstrate incongruities between the respective positions of...

Broadening the Productivity Lens in Criminology and Criminal Justice: An Exploratory Study of the Research Contributions of Master’s Degree Program Faculty, 2014–2018

Much work by criminology and criminal justice scholars assesses and ranks doctoral programs and faculty based on productivity measured as number of articles, journal prestige, and grantspersonship. These state-of-the-field publications provide important information about the subset of Ph.D. programs and their faculty. Less attention is paid in these discussions to productivity among faculty at master’s degree granting programs; omitting a considerable bulk of scholars. Using self-report survey data from 34 residential criminal justice master’s degree granting programs, the present research explores productivity of faculty by examining a variety of publication outlets and grantspersonship to assess contributions to the field over a five-year period, 2014–2018. This study is a first step in understanding the strengths of master’s level program faculty and their representation in the discipline. The paper concludes by outlining future considerations for research to extend the discussion on faculty productivity to scholars from a wider-range of programs.

For academics, what matters more: journal prestige or readership?

For academics, what matters more: journal prestige or readership?

Gender variations in citation distributions in medicine are very small and due to self-citation and journal prestige.

A number of studies suggest that scientific papers with women in leading-author positions attract fewer citations than those with men in leading-author positions. We report the results of a matched case-control study of 1,269,542 papers in selected areas of medicine published between 2008 and 2014. We find that papers with female authors are, on average, cited between 6.5 and 12.6% less than papers with male authors. However, the standardized mean differences are very small, and the percentage overlaps between the distributions for male and female authors are extensive. Adjusting for self-citations, number of authors, international collaboration and journal prestige, we find near-identical per-paper citation impact for women and men in first and last author positions, with self-citations and journal prestige accounting for most of the small average differences. Our study demonstrates the importance of focusing greater attention on within-group variability and between-group overlap of distributions when interpreting and reporting results of gender-based comparisons of citation impact.

Enriching Our Understanding of Health Care Management Journals: A Career Value and Cognitive Mapping Approach

ABSTRACTHealth management-related journals embody the place where scholarly and professional knowledge resides. Stakeholders—academicians, universities, libraries, and publishers—harbor interest in journal evaluations such as ratings and rankings in order to make sense of these journals. Although acceptance rates and impact factors enjoy wide consensus validity and are used as evaluative measures of journal prestige, they do not provide insights into journal focus or substantive orientation. An alternative cognitive mapping approach to ascertain how health care management journals are perceived with a new assessment criterion, Career value to an author by publishing in a journal, is introduced. The data were analyzed by multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analyses, resulting in a two-dimensional, nine cluster map. Nine clusters of perceptually related journals were ordered according to perceived career value. The presented map and clusters offer a complementary framework for comprehending how journals are understood by health management scholars.

The Administrative State and The Death of Peter Gleason, MD: An Off-Label Case Report.

The Administrative State and The Death of Peter Gleason, MD: An Off-Label Case Report.

The adoption of Article Processing Charges as a business model by Brazilian Open Access journals

Abstract Different funding and business model alternatives for Open Access to scientific publication have been discussed and tried, either by Gold open access journals or by the ‘hybrid’ ones. A growing number of both types of scholarly journals have adopted a publication fee – more specifically an Article Processing Charge – as their open access business model, a procedure that has been the subject of controversies. The objective of this study is to characterize Brazilian open access journals that adopt article processing charges. The main contribution of this study is to audit and support decision making of editorial policies and business models for open access that are being proposed by and for Brazilian journals. We defined a sample of Brazilian open access journals using article processing charges extracted from the Directory of Open Access Journals database in April 2018 along with their classification in the Scimago Journal Ranking, Journal Citation Reports and Qualis Capes system, considered as an indicator of prestige of academic journals. The study reveals that a small number of Brazilian open access journals are currently applying article processing charges, with practices varying mainly according to fields of study, types of organization and classification according to the Qualis system.

Evidence-based Nurse Staffing: ICN's New Position Statement.

Evidence-based Nurse Staffing: ICN's New Position Statement.

Adjusted Citation Rate, an Alternative Metric to Measure the Impact of General Radiology Journals

The journal impact factor (JIF) is often used to assess the prestige of scientific journals. Citations from original articles and reviews as well as citations from noncitable items contribute to the numerator in these calculations. However, since noncitable articles are not included in the denominator, the JIF may be skewed by the types of articles and not accurately reflect the prestige of the journal. The purpose of our study was to develop an alternative and complementary metric by which journals may be assessed. This "adjusted citation rate metric" is based on citations that originate only from citable items in the journal. We tabulated the number of citations and citable items for original articles from the Web of Science Core Collection for 5 consecutive years (2010-2014) for 20 general radiology journals. The adjusted citation rates (CR) per original article and reviews were calculated using only citations that originated from citable items. The adjusted CR in 2015 was similar to the JIF in 14 of the 20 journals, higher in four journals, and lower in two journals. Using this system, Radiology, Investigative Radiology, and European Radiology remained first, second, and third respectively among journals published in the field of general radiology. To allow for equal distribution of original articles vs reviews among general radiology journals, we calculated the adjusted CR where the standard distribution of original articles is 50%. Adjusted citation rate is an objective index for assessing journal impact that can serve as an alternative and complementary metric with which to measure the journal impact.

A Fine Balance: How Authors Strategize Around Journal Submission.

Publishing in peer-reviewed journals is essential for medical education researchers. Competition remains fierce for top journals, and authors are advised to consider impact factor (IF), audience, and alignment of focus. However, little is known about how authors balance these factors when making submission decisions. The authors aimed to explore decision making around journal choice. Using constructivist grounded theory, the authors conducted and analyzed 27 semistructured phone interviews (August-November 2016) with medical education researchers. Participants were recruited from a larger study, and all had presented abstracts at medical education meetings in 2005 or 2006. When deciding where to submit an article, participants weighed a journal's IF and prestige against other factors, such as a journal's vision and mission, finding the right audience, study-specific factors including perceived quality of the work, and the peer review process. The opportunity cost of aiming high and risking rejection was influenced by career stage and external pressures. Despite much higher IFs, clinical journals were viewed as less desirable for establishing legitimacy in the medical education field and were often targeted for less novel or rigorous work. Participants expressed dissatisfaction with peer review in general, citing overly critical and poorly informed reviewers. Authors strategize around a particular article's submission by attempting to balance many interrelated factors. Their perceptions that high-IF clinical journals are viewed as less prestigious in this field can lead to publication strategies running counter to advice given to junior faculty. This has implications for mentorship and institutional leadership.