Search results

1 – 10 of over 36000
Article
Publication date: 11 April 2016

Haifeng Guo, Bo Wang, Xiaotuo Qiao and Renhui Liu

– The purpose of this paper is to review studies on ranking in finance journals, which have grown substantially in recent decades.

728

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to review studies on ranking in finance journals, which have grown substantially in recent decades.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper depicts the trend and development of ranking studies in finance area, describes the regional work and lists the studies which focus on specific journal. This paper discusses some important and possible issues of ranking studies in finance in the future and makes some conclusions.

Findings

First, the authors find that the assessing method has changed from counting number to citation-based method. Second, the authors sort the ranking studies which focus on the research and publication quality based on regional area. Finally, in specific journal ranking studies, the authors can find how a journal reputation has changed, better or worse.

Originality/value

This paper reviews the ranking studies in finance area and particularly focusses on three parts. Because of the importance of ranking studies in research quality assessing, a series of issues are raised to improve the assessing objectiveness of journal ranking.

Details

Managerial Finance, vol. 42 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0307-4358

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 26 June 2009

Ji Wu, Qian Hao and Michelle Y.M. Yao

The purpose of this paper is report the importance of research publications for the tenure promotion and for faculty in accounting, finance, and information system (IS) areas…

5803

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is report the importance of research publications for the tenure promotion and for faculty in accounting, finance, and information system (IS) areas, developing valid criteria for the assessment of quality in related journals is necessary.

Design/methodology/approach

Existing rankings are usually based on a survey among faculty members, while ignoring the chairs' critical role in tenure evaluation. This paper uses department chairs' responses to a survey asking to assess relative journal quality, and hence provides quantitative standards to measure research productivity. The rankings are primarily obtained by the familiarity‐rank position index method. Different sets of rankings for the decision‐makers in universities, with various requirements for research are provide.

Findings

It is found that the rankings in accounting and finance areas are consistent with the prior research, but the rankings in the IS have changed significantly. This difference to the rapid growth in the field of IS is attributed. The robustness check also corroborates the ranking lists.

Originality/value

In addition, this paper reports not only a comprehensive ranking list including most journals in accounting, finance, and IS areas, but also separate rankings in each field.

Details

International Journal of Accounting & Information Management, vol. 17 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1834-7649

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 25 February 2022

Domingo Docampo and Vicente Safón

In this paper, the authors use a new methodology, called paper affiliation index, to create finance journal ranking using expert judgment and research impact, both of which are…

Abstract

Purpose

In this paper, the authors use a new methodology, called paper affiliation index, to create finance journal ranking using expert judgment and research impact, both of which are based on secondary, objective measures, thus making it possible to produce lists every year without human manipulation at virtually no cost.

Design/methodology/approach

Bibliometrics. Python implementation.

Findings

A new ranking with 65 finance journals.

Research limitations/implications

This procedure helps to reduce bias and to deal with known problems associated with current methodologies. The data used in the methodology comes from public sources; the procedure is therefore easily replicable. This methodology is not subject-dependent and thus can be transferred to other realms of knowledge. Once the bibliometric institutional data has been gathered, the procedure is not computationally costly: a Python implementation of the algorithm executes the whole computation in a few seconds. Results seem to correct the pernicious Matthew effect which is so evident in citation-based methods.

Originality/value

The institutional classification created includes all institutions that have contributed papers to the field of finance. The procedure helps to reduce bias and to deal with known problems associated with current methodologies. The data used in the methodology comes from public sources, the procedure is therefore easily replicable. The methodology is not subject-dependent and thus can be transferred to other realms of knowledge. Once the bibliometric institutional data has been gathered, the procedure is not computationally costly.

Details

Managerial Finance, vol. 48 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0307-4358

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 11 April 2016

Erin H. Kao, Chuan-Hao Hsu, Yunlin Lu and Hung-Gay Fung

Prior studies in citation-based journal rankings tend to be static to compare across journals. One journal may be judged better in citations than other journals at some points in…

Abstract

Purpose

Prior studies in citation-based journal rankings tend to be static to compare across journals. One journal may be judged better in citations than other journals at some points in time but not at the others. The assumption that the citation distribution is normally distributed and that the citation observations are independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) may not be appropriate. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Design/methodology/approach

This study uses a stochastic dominance (SD) analysis, which overcomes the dynamic nature of changes in citation over time. The SD method proposed by Linton, Maasoumi, and Whang (hereafter LMW, 2005) does not require the data to be i.i.d. We use the LMW method to compare the relative ranking of 23 finance journals using citations for all articles from them during 1990-2010.

Findings

The study indicates that the citation distribution changes over time. Thus a SD analysis is a better approach for a comparison of journal ranking. The findings unambiguously place JF, JFE, RFS, JFQA, and JFI in the top five spots of the finance journal ranking. The “near-top” journals, such as JBF, JCF, and FM, are not clear cut in the SD analysis.

Research limitations/implications

The results confirm that ranking for the lower ranked journals may change over time especially, but the top three journals appear to be robust across methods and over time.

Originality/value

The results of SD analysis provides more convincing evidence on finance journal ranking and could be useful to rank academic institutions, faculty research quality, and help the authors to decide what to read and which journals are influential.

Details

Managerial Finance, vol. 42 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0307-4358

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 11 April 2016

Kam C. Chan, Annie Wong and Hannah Wong

The purpose of this paper is to provide a complementary analysis of finance journals that are often being overlooked in prior studies. Specifically, the authors examine the…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to provide a complementary analysis of finance journals that are often being overlooked in prior studies. Specifically, the authors examine the Australian Business Dean Council’s (ABDC’s) C-ranked journals in terms of their authors’ affiliations with US colleges, US colleges with Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) accreditations, and US colleges with AACSB doctoral program accreditations.

Design/methodology/approach

A list of C-ranked journals is downloaded from the ABDC’s website. Full-text articles of these journals are downloaded from library databases for the five-year period of 2009-2013. Author affiliations are collected from the corresponding articles. Journal histories, journal editor locations, Cabell’s journal rankings, and acceptance rates are collected from the ABDC’s database, Cabell’s Directory, journal websites, and library databases. The final sample consists of 28 finance journals.

Findings

The authors find that these journals have a substantial number and percentage of authors from US colleges. Among the US authors, about 92 percent of them are from AACSB accredited schools and most of them are from AACSB accredited schools with doctoral programs. The findings support the notion that these journals are important publication outlets for US researchers. The authors also find that journals with longer histories and US-based editors have a higher percentage of US authors. In addition, journals with better Cabell’s journal rankings and higher rejection rates have higher percentage of US authors from AACSB accredited schools with doctoral programs.

Originality/value

C-ranked journals are often neglected in prior studies on journal characteristics because they are less well-known and less likely to be cited. However, these journals constitute as many as half of all finance journals in the ABDC database and can be important publication outlets for finance researchers. This study contributes to the literature by examining the author characteristics of these journals, namely, the proportions of authors who come from US colleges and authors who come from AACSB accredited US programs. Such an analysis will provide valuable insight into the value of these journals.

Details

Managerial Finance, vol. 42 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0307-4358

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 11 April 2016

Kam C. Chan, Anna Fung, Hung-Gay Fung and Jot Yau

The purpose of this paper is to provide a selective review of literature and presents a conceptual framework in journal and institution rankings. Several streams of ranking

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to provide a selective review of literature and presents a conceptual framework in journal and institution rankings. Several streams of ranking literature are analyzed.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors provide a conceptual framework to analyze the literature of journal and school ranking. Thus, several streams of ranking literature are analyzed to support the conceptual framework.

Findings

Through the lens of a context-driven framework, the authors point to originality, utility, and timeliness as aspects that contribute to the recent increase of the ranking literature. Finally, the authors discuss other issues that arise within ranking due to subjective biases, institutional preferences and difficulties establishing weighting measurements, as well as the future direction of ranking.

Research limitations/implications

The authors propose a context-based ranking framework to analyze rankings as factors that influence the environment may ultimately affect the usefulness of these rankings. It also implies that ranking of a journal or institution is a relative measure, as the context in which rankings are derived may change over time. Ultimately, the relative benchmarks used in the ranking will change as newer, more relevant metrics are developed.

Originality/value

The conceptual framework is new and provides a useful benchmark to understand ranking of journals and school.

Details

Managerial Finance, vol. 42 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0307-4358

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 11 April 2016

Morris G. Danielson and Jean L. Heck

The purpose of this paper is to update and extend Danielson and Heck (2014) to provide additional evidence about the relative quality of a set of 23 high-impact finance journals

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to update and extend Danielson and Heck (2014) to provide additional evidence about the relative quality of a set of 23 high-impact finance journals. In particular, the paper summarizes the research records of all scholars contributing articles to each of the 23 journals from 1970 to 2014, and uses this information to identify journals that publish articles by similar sets of authors, and rank the 23 journals based upon publication activity from 2010 to 2014.

Design/methodology/approach

The names of all authors appearing in each of the 23 journals during the 1970 to 2014 period – and the number of appearances by each author – were summarized directly from the journals’ table of contents. From this data, the lifetime (1970-2014) research portfolio of each journal’s average author was quantified for two sub-periods: 1970-2009 and 2010-2014. Using the assumption that a journal’s quality is positively related to its ability to attract submissions from accomplished researchers, this data provides information about the authors’ subjective ranking of finance journals and about how these rankings have changed during the past five years.

Findings

The finance literature experienced rapid growth during 2010-2014, with almost 25 percent of all appearances from 1970 to 2014 occurring in the last five years of the period. Based upon publication activity during 2010-2014, the Journal of Finance, the Review of Financial Studies, the Journal of Financial Economics, and the Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis remain the most prestigious finance outlets, followed by the Financial Analysts Journal, the Journal of Financial Markets, Review of Finance, the Journal of Financial Intermediation, Financial Management, and the Journal of Applied Corporate Finance.

Research limitations/implications

The identification of a unique set of the 23 “best” journals in any academic field is an inherently subjective task. Adding journals to (or removing journals from) this population could cause the ranking of some individual journals to shift.

Originality/value

Evidence about the average quality of articles appearing in the leading finance journals is useful when evaluating faculty research records for purposes of tenure, promotion, and merit awards.

Details

Managerial Finance, vol. 42 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0307-4358

Keywords

Book part
Publication date: 11 July 2023

Emmanuel Edache Michael, Joy Nankyer Dabel-Moses, Dare John Olateju, Ikoojo David Emmanuel and Vincent Edache Michael

In this chapter, we conduct a metadata analysis of articles published in accounting, business and finance journals ranked by Australian Business Dean Council (ABDC), and…

Abstract

In this chapter, we conduct a metadata analysis of articles published in accounting, business and finance journals ranked by Australian Business Dean Council (ABDC), and benchmarked against the Chartered Association of Business Schools (ABS) ranking, that discuss firm- and country-level greenhouse gas (GHG) emission practices and reporting. Number of publications on GHG research, research methods, number of citations and ratio, across countries and continents are some of the topics we cover. We employ a list of articles on accounting, business and finance journals ranked A* and A in the ABDC journal rankings from 2015 to 2022. The study uses a structured literature review to analyse 74 papers on GHG reporting practices at the firm- and country level. Although this line of enquiry is still nascent and developing, the study found underrepresentation of Africa and the Middle East in GHG literature generally. In addition, majority of the articles examined also concentrate on quantitative methods. Most of the articles on GHG research are A-ranked in the ABDC ranking scheme. It was also found that few studies focus on the countries and companies with the highest emissions. While there has been some progress in interrogating GHG across the globe, there is still much room for further research. A key area of future research is exploring the GHG reporting practices in the African and the Middle Eastern sub-regions. There is also a need to examine countries and companies with high emissions. A further study needs to explore the benefits of other research methods in addition to quantitative methods, as different research methods could yield different insights that would enhance research-based conclusions.

Details

Green House Gas Emissions Reporting and Management in Global Top Emitting Countries and Companies
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-80262-883-8

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 4 March 2014

Kam C. Chan, Chih-Hsiang Chang, Jamie Y. Tong and Feida (Frank) Zhang

The purpose of this paper is to conduct an assessment of the research productivity of the accounting and finance community in UK higher education institutions (HEIs) during…

1061

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to conduct an assessment of the research productivity of the accounting and finance community in UK higher education institutions (HEIs) during 1991-2010 using 44 high-quality accounting and finance journals.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors follow Chan et al. (2011) to use their 22 finance journals. For accounting journals, the paper includes a set of 24 accounting journals that were used in a global accounting ranking study by Chan et al. (2007). The paper uses the number of coauthors (n) and coaffiliations (M) to derive the weighted articles as the measurement metric.

Findings

In general, the research output in terms of weighted articles steadily increases during the 20-year period. The University of Manchester, London School of Economics, and London Business School are the top-three HEIs using 44 accounting and finance journals for the full sample. The authors also find that it is a challenge to publish multiple articles. If an author is able to manage five total appearances, he/she is in the top 16 percent among the 1,447 UK authors. Furthermore, the paper finds that many highly productive authors are able to move to different jobs during the 20-year period.

Research limitations/implications

The assessment of research productivity is, unavoidably, based on a set of selected accounting and finance journals. Hence, no matter what journal screening criteria the paper uses, there is always a subjective element in the process. If other journals or more/less journals were to be included in a similar study, different results may emerge. As a way to extend the value of the research, it would be interesting to obtain broader institutional knowledge, such as the tenure requirements of HEIs in UK, and information on the institutions where faculty members obtained their doctoral degrees, so that the authors can better evaluate the research productivity among accounting and finance community in the UK.

Originality/value

The paper conducts an assessment of the research productivity of accounting and finance community in UK HEIs during 1991-2010 using 44 high-quality accounting and finance journals. The study fills the gap of the extant literature to compliment the assessment of the UK accounting and finance departments in RAEs.

Details

Managerial Finance, vol. 40 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0307-4358

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 10 February 2012

Kam C. Chan, Pikki Lai and Kartono Liano

The objective of this paper is to simultaneously identify influential articles, journals, institutions, and researchers in marketing research in recent years using a threshold…

2624

Abstract

Purpose

The objective of this paper is to simultaneously identify influential articles, journals, institutions, and researchers in marketing research in recent years using a threshold citation analysis.

Design/methodology/approach

The threshold citation analysis counts the number of times a research work is cited by articles published in a set of elite marketing journals. In order to be included in the analysis, the research work must be cited 18 or more times. This threshold is used to measure influence and is unique in the ranking of marketing research. The threshold citation analysis incorporates the quality, the importance, and the influence of research works in the ranking criteria and is not limited to a set of journals nor confined by the year a research work is published.

Findings

The three frequently cited articles in marketing research are Fornell and Larcker, Baron and Kenny, and Anderson and Gerbing. Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research, and Journal of Consumer Research are the three marketing journals having the greatest influence in marketing research. As for the ranking of institutions, the three most influential institutions in marketing research are Northwestern University, the University of Pennsylvania, and the University of Michigan while the three frequently cited authors in marketing research are Richard Oliver, Valarie Zeithaml, and James Anderson.

Originality/value

First, this study identifies influential research works, journals, institutions, and researchers in marketing simultaneously and is in sharp contrast to the traditional approaches that identify influential research works, journals, institutions, and researchers separately. Second, this analysis mitigates the limitations that have plagued the quantity oriented publication‐based approach and the quality oriented citation‐based approach, making these findings more robust and inclusive. Finally, this paper identifies non‐marketing journals, non‐marketing articles, and scholarly books that have significant impact on contemporary marketing research. Consequently, this study offers new and comprehensive insights to the rankings research in marketing that were neglected by previous studies.

Details

European Journal of Marketing, vol. 46 no. 1/2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0309-0566

Keywords

1 – 10 of over 36000