Factors Influencing Chinese Authors' Perceptions of Journal Quality: A Comparison Between Two Academic Fields

Serials Review

Volumn 38, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 17-23

  Zhang, Zili ^a   Zhang, Ziqiong ^a   Li, Xiangyang ^a   Jiang, Minghui ^a  

^a HARBIN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (China)

Author keywords

Acceptance rate; Author perceived quality; Editor service; Immediacy index; Impact factor; Publication delay

Indexed keywords

EID: 84862797950     PISSN: 00987913     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.serrev.2011.12.002     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Adams J., King C., Ma N. The new geography of science: Research and collaboration in China [News Bulletin] URL. http://researchanalytics.thomsonreuters.com/m/pdfs/grr-china-nov09.pdf.
2. Aronson E., Mills J. The effect of severity of initiation on liking for a group. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 1959, 59(2):177-181.
3. Bailar J.I., Angell M., Boots S., Myers E., Palmer N., Shipley M., et al. Ethics and policy in scientific publication 1990, Council of Biology Editors, Bethesda, MD.
4. Bhattacharjee S., Tung Y.A., Pathak B. Author experiences with the IS journal review process. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 2004, 13(1):629-653.
5. Bohrer P., Dolphin R. Expectations and support for scholarly activity in schools of business. Journal of Education for Business 1985, 61(3):101-105.
6. Bollen J., Rodriguez M.A., de Sompel H.V. Journal status. Scientometrics 2006, 69(3):669-687.
7. Boor M. The citation impact factor: Another dubious index of journal quality. American Psychologist 1982, 37(8):975-977.
8. Brinn T., Jones M.J., Pendelbury M. UK accountants' perceptions of research journal quality. Accounting and Business Research 1996, 26(3):265-278.
9. Brown T. Journal quality metrics: Options to consider other than impact factors. American Journal of Occupational Therapy 2011, 65(3):346-350.
10. Brown L.D., Huefner R.S. The familiarity with and perceived quality of accounting journals: Views of senior accounting faculty in leading US MBA programs. Contemporary Accounting Research 1994, 11(1):223-250.
11. Catling J.C., Mason V.L., Upton D. Quality is in the eye of the beholder? An evaluation of impact factors and perception of journal prestige in the UK. Scientometrics 2009, 81(2):333-345.
12. Coe R., Weinstock I. Evaluating the finance journals: The department chairperson's perspective. The Journal of Financial Research 1983, 6(4):345-349.
13. Coe R., Weinstock I. Evaluating journal publications of marketing professors: A second look. Journal of Marketing Education 1983, 5(1):37-42.
14. Coe R., Weinstock I. Evaluating the management journals: A second look. Academy of Management Journal 1984, 27(3):660-666.
15. Dióspatonyi I., Horvai G., Braun T. Publication speed in analytical chemistry journals. Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences 2001, 41(6):1452-1456.
16. Doke E.R., Luke R.H. Perceived quality of CIS/MIS journals among faculty: Publishing hierarchies. Journal of Computer Information Systems 1987, 27(4):30-33.
17. Donohue J.M., Fox J.B. A multi-method evaluation of journals in the decision and management sciences by US academics. Omega 2000, 28(1):17-36.
18. Durieux V., Gevenois P.A. Bibliometric indicators: Quality measurements of scientific publication. Radiology 2010, 255(2):342-351.
19. Extejt M.M., Smith J.E. The behavioral sciences and management: An evaluation of relevant journals. Journal of Management 1990, 16(3):539-551.
20. Favaloro E.J. Measuring the quality of journals and journal articles: The impact factor tells but a portion of the story. Seminars in Thrombosis and Hemostasis 2008, 34(1):7-25.
21. Ferreira R.R., DeFranco A.L., Rappole C.L. Hospitality program directors' rating on hospitality journals. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Educator 1998, 10(1):46-52.
22. Frey B.S., Rost K. Do rankings reflect research quality. Journal of Applied Economics 2010, 13(1):1-38.
23. Freyne J., Coyle L., Smyth B., Cunningham P. Relative status of journal and conference publications in computer science. Communications of the ACM 2010, 53(11):124-132.
24. Gibson M., Spong C.Y., Simonsen S.E., Martin S., Scott J.R. Author perception of peer review. Obstetrics and Gynecology 2008, 112(3):646-651.
25. Giles M.W., Mizell F., Patterson D. Political scientists' journal evaluations revisited. PS: Political Science & Politics 1989, 22(3):613-617.
26. Glenn N.D. American sociologists' evaluations of sixty-three journals. American Sociologist 1971, 6(4):298-303.
27. Haensly P.J., Hodges P.E., Davenport S.A. Acceptance rates and journal quality: An analysis of journals in economics and finance. Journal of Business & Finance Librarianship 2009, 14(1):2-31.
28. Herxheimer A. Make scientific journals more responsive and responsible. Scientist 1989, 3(6):9-11.
29. Institute for Scientific Information 2001 Science Citation Index: Journal Citation Reports 2001, Institute for Scientific Information, Philadelphia.
30. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors Conflict of interest. The Lancet 1993, 341(8847):742-743.
31. Kurmis A.P. Understanding the limitations of the journal impact factor. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 2003, 85-A(12):2449-2454.
32. Licinio J. Molecular psychiatry: The highest immediacy index in the field of psychiatry. Molecular Psychiatry 2006, 11(4):324-324.
33. Lowry P.B., Humphreys S., Malwitz J., Nix J. A scientometric study of the perceived quality of business and technical communication journals. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 2007, 50(4):352-378.
34. Mahoney T. Journal publishing and the organization sciences: An analysis of exchanges. Publishing in the organizational sciences 1985, 14-34. Irwin, Homewood, IL. L. Cummings, P. Frost (Eds.).
35. Marchi M.D., Rocchi M. The editorial policies of scientific journals: Testing an impact factor model. Scientometrics 2001, 51(2):395-404.
36. McDonald S., Feather J. British library and information science journals: A study of quality control. Journal of Information Science 1995, 21(5):359-369.
37. McKercher B., Law R., Lam T. Rating tourism and hospitality journals. Tourism Management 2006, 27(6):1235-1252.
38. McVeigh M.E. Open access journals in the ISI citation databases: Analysis of impact factors and citation patterns. A citation study from Thomson Scientific [News Bulletin] URL. http://science.thomsonreuters.com/m/pdfs/openaccesscitations2.pdf.
39. Milenković P. Editorial communication with authors. Archive of Oncology 2002, 10(2):91-92.
40. Mylonopoulos N.A., Theoharakis V. Global perceptions of IS journals. Communications of the ACM 2001, 44(9):29-33.
41. Nisonger T.E., Davis C.H. The perception of library and information science journals by LIS education deans and ARL library directors: A replication of the Kohl-Davis study. College and Research Libraries 2005, 66(4):341-377.
42. Opthof T. Sense and nonsense about the impact factor. Cardiovascular Research 1997, 33(1):1-7.
43. Patterson, D., Snyder, L., & Ullman, J. (1999). Best practices memo: Evaluating computer scientists and engineers for promotion and tenure. Computer Research News, September, A-B.
44. Regazzi J.J., Aytac S. Author perceptions of journal quality. Learned Publishing 2008, 21(3):225-235.
45. Rodger S., McKenna K., Brown T. Quality and impact of occupational therapy journals: Authors' perspectives. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal 2007, 54(3):174-184.
46. Saha S., Saint S., Christakis D.A. Impact factor: A valid measure of journal quality. Journal of the Medical Library Association 2003, 91(1):42-46.
47. Schultz J., Mead J., Khurana I. The changing roles of teaching, research, and service in the promotion and tenure decisions for accounting faculty. Issues in Accounting Education 1989, 4(1):109-119.
48. Seglen P.O. Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. British Medical Journal 1997, 314(7079):498-502.
49. Shepherd D.C., Carley S.S., Stuart R.S. An exploratory investigation of the periodic performance evaluation processes for marketing faculty: A comparison of doctoral-granting and non-doctoral-granting universities. Journal of Marketing Education 2009, 31(2):143-153.
50. Stephen T.D. A methodology for calculating prestige ranks of academic journals in communication: A more inclusive alternative to citation metrics. Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian 2011, 30(2):63-71.
51. Strevens M. The role of the priority rule in science. Journal of Philosophy 2003, 100(2):55-79.
52. Thomson Reuters Glossary of Thomson Scientific [WWW page] URL. http://scientific.thomsonreuters.com/support/patents/patinf/terms/.
53. Thomson Reuters Thomson Reuters and ISTIC announce strategic partnership to jointly launch China's first laboratory for scientometrics research [WWW page] URL. http://thomsonreuters.com/content/press_room/science/310193.
54. Van Fleet D.D., McWilliams A., Siegel D.S. A theoretical and empirical analysis of journal rankings: The case of formal lists. Journal of Management 2000, 26(5):839-861.
55. Walstrom K.A., Hardgrave B.C. Forums for information systems scholars: III. Information Management 2001, 39(2):117-124.
56. Weber E.J., Katz P.P., Waeckerle J.F., Callaham M.L. Author perception of peer review: Impact of review quality and acceptance on satisfaction. Journal of the American Medical Association 2002, 287(21):2790-2793.
57. Whitman M.E., Hendrickson A.R., Townsend A.M. Research commentary: Academic rewards for teaching, research, and service: Data and disclosure. Information Systems Research 1999, 10(2):99-109.
58. Wróblewski A.K. A commentary on misuses of the impact factor. Scientometrics 2008, 56(6):355-356.
59. Yu G., Wang X.H., Yu D.R. The influence of publication delays on impact factors in the scientific field. Scientometrics 2005, 64(2):235-246.
60. Yue W., Wilson C.S., Rousseau R. The immediacy index and the journal impact factor: Two highly correlated derived measures. Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science 2004, 28(1):33-48.