A Post Publication Review of “Publication anxiety, quality, and journal rankings: Researchers views”

Abstract

ReviewJournal ranking systems are impacting academics in research-intensive universities worldwide. The paper by Coulthard and Keller contributes to existing knowledge in the area by empirically investigating the effects of journal ranking systems on research and the welfare of researchers, specifically in the discipline of information systems. Using chi-square tests and descriptive analyses on survey responses from a sample of 275 attendees of information systems conferences, the paper concludes that journal ranking systems have mixed impacts on research and the welfare of researchers. More specifically, in terms of research, the study finds that though journal ranking systems have been perceived as increasing publication quality (positive impact), such systems have also been perceived as inhibiting innovative, risky research and encouraging safe, conforming mainstream orthodoxy, which result in a lack of diverse, innovative, and ground breaking research (negative impacts). In terms of the welfare of researchers, the study finds that journal ranking systems contribute to the pressure to publish and to publication anxiety, especially in instances when time for research is insufficient and when regional, cross-disciplinary and qualitative research are threatened by publication bias by journals and its editors (negative impacts); no positive impacts of such systems on the welfare of researchers were reported.Notwithstanding the noteworthy empirical contributions from the study by Coulthard and Keller, this review identifies three substantive issues that may be of interest for future research.First, the state of theoretical contribution in the existing literature resulting from journal ranking systems needs to be framed and discussed more clearly and objectively. For example, the use of the technology acceptance model as a theoretical lens in information systems research is characterized as a form of orthodox, incremental research, which is considered undesirable by Coulthard and Keller as well as several other scholars (Benbasat and Barki, 2007;Grover and Lyytinen, 2015). However, proponents of the theory may have an alternative and justifiable view of its use and value-e.g. the relevance and value of technology acceptance studies are predicated on its ability to identify avenues for attitudinal and behavioural change to encourage greater acceptance of myriad technologies among diverse communities. It is important to note that technology acceptance studies today are not limited to basic, conventional concepts, such as perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness. Instead, noteworthy efforts are being made to extend (e.g. through theoretical integration; Lim, 2015) or apply (e.g. in experimental settings; Teh et al., in press) the technology acceptance model meaningfully. This is part and parcel of theoretical extension (i.e. a type of theoretical contribution accepted by top journals), and thus its importance should not be downplayed. More importantly, it is necessary to acknowledge that not all research will st...

Dialectic Antidotes to Critics of the Technology Acceptance Model: Conceptual, Methodological, and Replication Treatments for Behavioural Modelling in Technology-Mediated Environments

“…Ha and Stoel, 2009;Lim, 2015a;Lim and Ting, 2012). In that sense, the model is likely to suffer from overwhelming replication, with the possibility that endeavours to offer incremental contributions to the field may become extremely difficult, if not nearly impossible-an issue that resonates with many in the information systems and technology discipline (Lim, 2016).…”

“…For behavioural modelling in technology-mediated environments, ground-breaking contributions are often evaluated more favourably than incremental contributions delivered by replications (Coulthard and Keller, 2016;Lim, 2016). Direct replication of previously published empirical studies is challenging because of likely differences in study location, personnel, and time, as well as the threat of evolving socioeconomic changes and rapid technological proliferation, and thus the general understanding of replication herein encapsulates the action or process of repeating the test of similar propositions by using similar and dissimilar methodological procedures for behavioural modelling (e.g.…”

Resource-Based View of Information Systems: Sustainable and Transient Competitive Advantage Perspectives

“…The keys to sustaining the competitive advantage of information systems can come from greater alignment between alternative (e.g. business) and information system strategies (Choe, 2003;Liang & You, 2009), complementary synergies with other internal and external firm resources (Hulland et al, 2007;Ravichandran & Lertwongsatien, 2005), innovation (Grant, 1999;Shin, 2006), which may be incremental, or even better, ground-breaking (Coulthard & Keller, 2016;Lim, 2016), and systematic and timely upgrades of organizational (e.g. expertise, skills) and functional capabilities (e.g.…”