Experts’ Judgments of Management Journal Quality

Abstract

Copyright and reuse:The Warwick Research Archive Portal (WRAP) makes this work by researchers of the University of Warwick available open access under the following conditions. Copyright © and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable the material made available in WRAP has been checked for eligibility before being made available.Copies of full items can be used for personal research or study, educational, or not-for profit purposes without prior permission or charge. Provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way. Publisher's statement:This is the accepted version of the following article: Peters, K., Daniels, K., Hodgkinson, Gerard P., 1961-and Haslam, S. A.. (2012 Experts' judgments of management journal quality : an identity concerns model. Journal of Management Studies . ISSN 0022-2380 , which has been published in final form at http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206311434532 . A note on versions:The version presented here may differ from the published version or, version of record, if you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the 'permanent WRAP url' above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription. ABSTRACTMany lists that purport to gauge the quality of journals in management and organization studies (MOS) are based on the judgments of experts in the field. This paper develops an Identity Concerns Model (ICM) that suggests that such judgments are likely to be shaped by the personal and social identities of evaluators. The model was tested in a study in which 168 editorial board members rated 44 MOS journals. In line with the ICM, respondents rated journal quality more highly to the extent that a given journal reflected their personal concerns (associated with having published more papers in that journal) and the concerns of a relevant ingroup (associated with membership of the journal's editorial board, or a particular disciplinary or geographical background). However, judges' ratings of journals in which they had published were more favorable when those journals had a low quality reputation and their ratings of journals that reflected their geographical and disciplinary affiliation were more favorable when those journals had a high quality reputation. Our findings are thus consistent with the view that identity concerns come to the fore in journal ratings when there is either a need to protect against personal identity threat or a meaningful opportunity to promote social identity. (204 words)Keywords: Journal quality, journal lists, social identity, self-favoring bias Lewis, 2008). This suggests that in spite of the debate over whether the journal can be regarded as a meaningful unit of analysis (Starbuck, 2005) there is a degree of consensus in MOS th...

Taylorizing business school research: On the ‘one best way’ performative effects of journal ranking lists

“…ix Of course, the peer review process is time-consuming, imprecise, unsystematic and subject to cronyism (Bedeian, Van Fleet and Hyman, 2009a;2009b;Peters et al, 2012), and so is easily trashed for being inefficient and unreliable, in contrast to a journal list which offers impressive precision and systematicity. The creators of the ABS list assert that "although high quality research may on occasion be published in lesser ranked journals and vice versa, these exceptions to the rule do not invalidate the overall assessment of the quality of the research published in a journal" (Harvey, Kelly, et al, 2010: 4).…”

“…Each ranking metric comprises elements of (i) measures of impact derived from numbers of citations in selected journals and (ii) some moderation of (i) by forms of peer evaluation which, as Peters et al (2012) note, can be a mixed blessing. The resulting rank order is often then hierarchically divided into "top" (A/world elite) "middle"…”

The Productivity of Economics Research in Slovakia

“…The 1993-19952014-2016Index 2014-2016relative to 1993-1995(1993-1995 these articles were published in economics journals, and the rest (30%) were published in noneconomics journals. Some noneconomics articles by associate and full professors in economics departments were published in fields that are complementary to economics research (e.g., mathematics, statistics).…”

“…An alternative method for valuation of journal quality is based on expert judgment. The disadvantage of this approach is that it can be subjective and represent the personal bias of the experts (Peters et al 2014;So 1998). 3.…”

A Bayesian approach for incorporating expert opinions into decision support systems: A case study of online consumer-satisfaction detection

“…In the past, human experts often played a monocratic role in managerial decision making. The status of expert is granted on the basis of the individual's professional characteristics and track record, and intuition has been shown to play a critical role in expert decision making [16].…”