Search results

The purpose of this research is to examine the composition of the editorial boards of 60 academic accounting journals with a particular focus on the university affiliations of editorial board members. The role of ad hoc reviewers is then analysed.

A detailed content analysis of the members of the 60 editorial boards was conducted. The authors concentrated on UK universities and journals, but also provide some data on non‐UK schools and journals.

There were six main findings. First, editorial appointments were normally held by nationals of the country where the journal was published. Second, US academics had a significant presence on all boards. Third, there was a lack of penetration of UK academics, particularly on US or high quality boards. Fourth, overseas academics were present in significant numbers on UK boards. Fifth, editorial board appointments tended to be concentrated in a limited number of institutions and individuals. Sixth, journals, particularly generalist journals, used reviewers extensively.

This research will inform the debate about the degree of influence which UK academics have on journal research agendas and on the international stage. The findings show that journal editorial boards do not capture all high ranking institutions and individuals. Editors could consider widening the scope of their editorial board opportunities.

This is the first comprehensive study into the editorial boards of accounting journals. It shows the presence of an editorial board elite.

Editorial boards of academic journals represent a key institutional mechanism in the governance and functioning of the academic community. Board members play an important role in knowledge production and development of the discipline. The purpose of this paper is to enquire into the diversity characteristics of boards of accounting journals.

Drawing on a diversity framework that distinguishes between societal diversity and value of diversity, the paper examines two board characteristics: gender diversity and internationalisation. Moreover, it examines the influence of three journal and two editor characteristics on board diversity and analyses trends over time.

On gender, overall board trends are consistent with societal diversity and value of diversity: boards reflect the gender profile of senior academics. Further, female representation on boards is broadly consistent across the different journal nationalities; has improved over time; has experienced a convergence in “gender sensitive” sub-disciplines; and is influenced by female editorship. However, inequities appear to be present at the highest level: women appear to be less well represented than men as editors and women also have a lower representation on boards of higher ranked journals than on those of lower ranked journals. On internationalisation, once again, overall trends broadly reflect societal diversity and value at diversity. However, international scholars are less well represented on 4* boards than on 2* and 3* boards and on US boards than on Australian and UK boards. Further, there are signs of weakening US dominance in non-US journals.

Drawing on the diversity framework, this is the first study to comprehensively examine gender diversity and internationalisation of accounting boards.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the level of international involvement in the editorial boards and content of the leading journals of the marketing discipline to investigate a reported bias against non‐US material.

The research employed two approaches: editorial board and content analysis of ten leading marketing journals, and interviews with an expert panel of senior marketing academics.

The top journals of the marketing journal were found to have low levels of international involvement, with high proportions of both US authors and data, and US membership of editorial boards. The editorial board analysis also revealed institutional links with journal boards, and a network of overlapping membership between the editorial boards. The expert panel provided divergent views on reasons for the USA dominance, but the board analysis seemed to best fit with the suggestion of networks of scholars who are naturally inclined to favor research that fits their world view.

To improve publishing success under the current status quo, scholars can emulate the favored (US) research approach and writing style; network with the “right” people; or raise a new research paradigm to dominance. Journal editors can increase the diversity in editorial boards to encourage international involvement in their publications.

The research combines traditional empirical investigation with qualitative input via an expert panel to provide new insight into barriers to global dissemination of scholarly research.

Despite over 20 years of academic hype, international human resource management (IHRM) literature has been only partly successful in its original claim to offer a universal panacea for complexities of managing people that can transcend national, cultural and economic divides. This paper provides evidence from earlier studies on limited nature of geographic coverage of the mainstream IHRM writing and surveys the editorial membership, policies and guidelines of a select number of journals with a view to contribute to our understanding of North American and Western European domination in this field. Exploring the major constraints in geographical and cultural reach of the IHRM journals and the geographic homogeneity in the membership profiles of their editorial boards, the paper offers strategies for change towards a more inclusive approach to research and writing in the field of IHRM.

The objective is to describe the “ethnocentricity” (i.e. geographical affiliation of editor(s), editorial board(s), editorial review board(s) and author(s)) of selected journals in services management.

The sample is restricted to the examination and comparison of five top journals in services management during a six‐year period. In total, the content analysis consisted of 1,189 articles.

The authors contend that there is in part a troublesome and challenging “ethnocentricity” in some of the examined journals.

The impact of “ethnocentricity” is underestimated in the examinations of academic journals in the field of services management. It is an important issue that needs to be raised and discussed in literature, due to the paradigmatic influences that it may have on the journal and its characteristics – in extension, the journal ranking and the journal quality.

The authors provide some suggestions, all of which are troublesome to implement. If done, it has to be done progressively and it will take time to not lose the current editorial scope and success of the journal.

This paper fills a knowledge gap in the literature by examining specific aspects of the “ethnocentricity” of “top” journals in the particular area of services management.

This study focusses on the participation of women in the development of the specialist international accounting history literature. Based on an examination of the three specialist, internationally refereed, accounting history journals in the English language from the time of first publication in each case to the year 2000, the study provides evidence of the involvement of women through publication and also through their membership of editorial boards and editorial advisory boards. In doing so, the study builds on the earlier work of Carnegie and Potter in 2000 and aims to augment our understanding of publishing patterns in the specialist international accounting history literature.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the “scientific identity” and “ethnocentricity” in the “top” journals of logistics management by studying the categories of papers published and the geographical affiliations of authors, editorial review boards, and editors in selected journals.

A sample of “top” scholarly journals in logistics management is selected on the basis of previous research, expert opinion, and journal ranking lists. The selection includes the International Journal of Logistics Management (IJLM), the International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management (IJPDLM), and the Journal of Business Logistics (JBL). The study considers all available papers (a total of 657) published in these journals over an eight‐year period from 2000 to 2007. The compiled results are analyzed for patterns that reveal the “scientific identity” and “ethnocentricity” of each of the selected journals.

There is a range of different categories of papers in the selected journals and there a fairly broad range of geographical affiliations of authors, editorial review boards, and editors. The overall variety of “scientific identities” and “ethnocentricity” among the journals studied here support in part the ongoing scientific exploration of logistics management, though it may be improved in the future.

Further research of the “scientific identity” and “ethnocentricity” of individual research journals is required in other sub‐disciplines of logistics.

Scholars will benefit from insights into the “scientific identities” and “ethnocentricity” of the “top” journals in logistics management. In particular, scholars can note the particular features of individual journals while acknowledging the paradigmatic flexibility and richness of research designs that are present in most of these journals.

This paper updates and extends previous research on methodological approaches in logistics management journals, but it appears to be the first study of the “scientific identity” of “top” logistics management journals in terms of categories of papers published and geographical affiliation of authors, editorial review boards, and editors. This paper provides valuable insights into the nature of academic publishing in the flourishing research field of logistics management.

This study aimed to identify the characteristics of excellent peer reviewers by using Publons.com (an open and free online peer review website).

Reviewers of the clinical medicine field on Publons were selected as the sample (n = 1,864). A logistic regression model was employed to examine the data.

The results revealed that reviewers' verified reviews, verified editor records, and whether they were the Publons mentors had significant and positive associations with excellent peer reviewers, while their research performance (including the number of articles indexed by Web of Science (WOS), citations, H-index and high-cited researcher), genders, words per review, number of current/past editorial boards, whether they had experiences of post-publication review on Publons and whether they were Publons academy graduates had no significant associations with excellent peer reviewers.

This study could help journals find excellent peer reviewers from free and open online platforms.

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-11-2021-0604.

The issue of gender inequality in the Italian universities and academic context does not seem to be particularly debated and is really rare. Starting from this “lack of interest”, the paper aims to inquire into the “state-of-the-art” of existing inequality in the scientific and academic path of Italian female scholars and academia, answering the following research question: Is discrimination between women and men linked to the number of scientific contributions in periodicals and their presence within academic boards of scientific accounting associations and journals in Italy?

The methodology is primarily developed through a deductive analysis of the literature strands concerning gender accounting, accounting in academia and the role of women in universities and academia. Second, within the inductive perspective, the authors have chosen to inquire into the scientific publications of women on the oldest Italian journal in the accounting field – the Rivista Italiana di Ragioneria e di Economia Aziendale (RIREA). Subsequently, the position and career of women were analysed in academia investigating their presence and role within the boards of a sample of Italian journals and the main Italian accounting scientific associations

Accordingly, this paper concentrates on gender inequalities in university and academia in Italy and on eventual obstacles that get in the way of the existence of scientific contributions in journals and of career progress of those women who carry on scholarly work in accounting.

The analysis confirms the need to open more space for women at the summits of political, economic and cultural institutions, including accounting academia and scientific journals. The paper has some limitations concerning the consideration of only Italian journals and academic associations. Then, we will develop the analysis in comparative terms, as attention will be addressed on the participation in scientific committees and boards of some of the major international scientific associations of accounting. Moreover, we will consider the narrative approach describing the stories of Italian women and accounting scholars to carefully investigate the reasons for this persistent discrimination.

The innovative contribution of the paper is due to the fact that the authors are unaware of previous studies aimed at investigating if female accounting scholars are under-represented compared to their male colleagues within the top positions of the most prestigious Italian accounting associations and scientific journals. Previous research also did not investigate the existence of correlation between Italian women’s scientific productivity, their under-representation within academia and scientific career.

The objective of this paper is to discuss some criteria in order to distinguish between top versus leading journals in marketing. The aim is to stimulate the debate of the adequacy of those issues that dominate in the top marketing journals.

The authors discuss three groups of criteria, namely journal, article, and research. Each is discussed based on a set of dimensions: journal criteria – the editor, the editorial board, the editorial objective and the author affiliations; article criteria – research implication, practice implication, readability and originality; and research criteria – process, paradigm, representation, readership and contribution.

While the top journals in marketing are named, the analysis is meant to be of a more general nature rather than to question or lambaste a specific journal.

There is an underlying quest for identifying and verifying the top academic journals in different research disciplines. As an extension to the discussion of top versus non‐top journals, the authors raise another crucial issue, namely criteria to differentiate between top and leading journals in marketing.

These criteria are based on the authors' examination of the editorial descriptions and overall contents of six top journals in marketing. The criteria are also derived from a review of the literature on academic journals and academic publishing.

The discussion may stimulate and widen debate with respect to what constitutes a leading academic journal in marketing. The suggested list of criteria should be seen as a trigger for further discussion. It does not aspire to be complete, but a complement to the ongoing discussion of academic journals and academic publishing in marketing.