Are Overall Journal Rankings a Good Mapping for Article Quality in Specialty Fields?. Issue 1 (2nd January 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Lo, Melody; Bao, Yong
• Is Part Of: Journal of business & economic statistics. Volume 34:Issue 1(2016)
• Page Start: 62
• Page End: 67
• Publication Date: 2016-01-02
• Subjects: Citations -- Economics journals -- Impact -- Ranking -- Specialty field journals; Economics -- Statistical methods -- Periodicals; Commercial statistics -- Periodicals; Économie politique -- Méthodes statistiques -- Périodiques; Statistique commerciale -- Périodiques; 330.015195
• DOI: 10.1080/07350015.2014.995798
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0735-0015

Abstract

Abstract : Overall journal rankings, which are generated with sample articles in different research fields, are commonly used to measure the research productivity of academic economists. In this article, we investigate a growing concern in the profession that the use of the overall journal rankings to evaluate scholars' relative research productivity may exhibit a downward bias toward researchers in some specialty fields if their respective field journals are under-ranked in the overall journals rankings. To address this concern, we constructed new journal rankings based on the intellectual influence of research in 8 specialty fields using a sample consisting of 26, 401 articles published across 60 economics journals from 1998 to 2007. We made various comparisons between the newly constructed journal rankings in specialty fields and the traditional overall journal ranking. Our results show that the overall journal ranking provides a considerably good mapping for the article quality in specialty fields. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.