A research note on the use of bibliometrics to review the corporate social responsibility and corporate social performance literature

Business and Society

Volumn 45, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 7-19

  De Bakker, Frank G A ^a   Groenewegen, Peter ^a   Den Hond, Frank ^a  

^a VU UNIVERSITY AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Bibliometry; Citation studies; Corporate social performance; Corporate social responsibility

Indexed keywords

EID: 32944473633     PISSN: 00076503     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0007650305283092     Document Type: Review

References (51)

1. Abbott, W. F., & Monsen, R. J. (1979). On the measurement of corporate social responsibility: Self-reported disclosures as a method of measuring corporate social involvement. Academy of Management Journal, 22, 501-515.
2. Agle, B. R., Mitchell, R. K., & Sonnenfeld, J. A. (1999). Who matters to CEOs? An investigation of stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance, and CEO values. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 507-525.
3. Alexander, G. J., & Buchholz, R. A. (1978). Corporate social responsibility and stock-market performance. Academy of Management Journal, 21, 479-486.
4. Arlow, P. (1991). Personal characteristics in college students evaluations of business ethics and corporate social-responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 10 (1). 63-69.
5. Aupperle, K. E., Carroll, A. B., & Hatfield, J. D. (1985). An empirical-examination of the relationship between corporate social- responsibility and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 446-463.
6. Baumann, H. (2003). Publish and perish? The impact of citation indexing on the development of new fields of environmental research. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 6 (3-4). 13-26.
7. Bowman, E. H., & Haire, M. (1975). Strategic posture toward corporate social responsibility. California Management Review, 18 (2). 49-58.
8. Boyd, B. K., Gove, S., & Hitt, M. A. (2005). Construct measurement in strategic management research: Illusion or reality? Strategic Management Journal, 26, 239-257.
9. Brown, T. J., & Dacin, P. A. (1997). The company and the product: Corporate associations and consumer product responses. Journal of Marketing, 61 (1). 68-84.
10. Burke, L., & Logsdon, J. M. (1996). How corporate social responsibility pays off. Long Range Planning, 29, 495-502.
11. Cameron, B. D. (2005). Trends in the usage of ISI bibliometric data: Uses, abuses, and implications. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 5, 105-125.
12. Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 4, 497-505.
13. Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Towards the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34, 39-48.
14. Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business and Society, 38, 268-295.
15. Clarkson, M. B. E. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20 (1). 92-117.
16. Cochran, P. L., & Wood, R. A. (1984). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 27, 42-56.
17. de Bakker, F. G. A., Groenewegen, P., & den Hond, F. (2005). Abibliometric analysis of 30 years of research and theory on corporate social responsibility and corporate social performance. Business & Society, 44, 283-317.
18. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147-160.
19. Esrock, S. L., & Leichty, G. B. (1998). Social responsibility and corporate web pages: Self-presentation or agenda-setting? Public Relations Review, 24, 305-319.
20. Graves, S. B., & Waddock, S. A. (1994). Institutional owners and corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1034-1046.
21. Greening, D. W., & Gray, B. (1994). Testing a model of organizational response to social and political issues. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 467-498.
22. Griffin, J. J., & Mahon, J. F. (1997). The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate: Twenty-five years of incomparable research. Business and Society, 36, 5-31.
23. Hill, V., & Carley, K. M. (1999). An approach to identifying consensus in a subfield: The case of organizational culture. Poetics, 27, 1-30.
24. Ingwersen, P. (2000). The international visibility and citation impact of Scandinavian research articles in selected Social Science fields: The decay of a myth. Scientometrics, 49 (1). 39-61.
25. Johnson, R. A., & Greening, D. W. (1999). The effects of corporate governance and institutional ownership types on corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 564-576.
26. Jones, T. M. (1995). Instrumental stakeholder theory. A synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review, 20, 404-437.
27. Klassen, R. D., & McLaughlin, C. P. (1996). The impact of environmental management on firm performance. Management Science, 42, 1199-1214.
28. Liu, M. (1993). Progress in documentation. The complexities of citation practice: A review of citation studies. Journal of Documentation, 49, 370-408.
29. McGuire, J. B., Sundgren, A., & Schneeweis, T. (1988). Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 854-872.
30. McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2000). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal, 21, 603-609.
31. McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26, 117-127.
32. Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22, 853-886.
33. Mizruchi, M. S., & Fein, L. C. (1999). The social construction of organizational knowledge: A study of uses of coercive, mimetic, and normative isomorphism. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 653-683.
34. Moed, H. F. (2002). The impact-factors debate: The ISI's uses and limits. Nature, 415 (6873). 731-732.
35. Pava, M. L., & Krausz, J. (1996). The association between corporate social-responsibility and financial performance: The paradox of social cost. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 321-357.
36. Roberts, R. W. (1992). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: An application of stakeholder theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17, 595-612.
37. Robertson, D. C. (1993). Empiricism in business ethics. Suggested research directions. Journal of Business Ethics, 12, 585-599.
38. Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38, 225-243.
39. Sethi, S. P. (1975). Dimensions of corporate social performance: An analytical framework. California Management Review, 17, 58-64.
40. Spicer, B. H. (1978). Investors, corporate social performance and information disclosure: An empirical study. The Accounting Review, 53, 94-111.
41. Stanwick, P. A., & Stanwick, S. D. (1998). The relationship between corporate social performance and organizational size, financial performance, and environmental performance: An empirical examination. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 195-204.
42. Sturdivant, F. D., & Ginter, J. L. (1977). Corporate social responsiveness: Management attitudes and economic performance. California Management Review, 19 (3). 30-39.
43. Swanson, D. L. (1995). Addressing a theoretical problem by reorienting the corporate social performance model. Academy of Management Review, 20, 43-64.
44. Thomson. (2005). Glossary of Thomson scientific terminology. Key Words Plus. Retrieved on September 26, 2005, from http://www.isinet.com/glossary/K
45. Turban, D. B., & Greening, D. W. (1997). Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 658-672.
46. Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance - Financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 303-319.
47. Wartick, S. L., & Cochran, P. L. (1985). The evolution of the corporate social performance model. Academy of Management Review, 10, 758-769.
48. Weaver, G. R., Trevino, L. K., & Cochran, P. L. (1999). Integrated and decoupled corporate social performance: Management commitments, external pressures, and corporate ethics practices. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 539-552.
49. Weingart, P. (2005). Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: Inadvertent consequences? Scientometrics, 62 (1). 117-131.
50. Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16, 691-718.
51. Wood, D. J., & Jones, R. (1995). Stakeholder mismatching: A theoretical problem in empirical research on corporate social performance. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 3, 229-267.