Interlocking editorship. A network analysis of the links between economic journals

Abstract

The exploratory analysis developed in this paper relies on the hypothesis that each editor possesses some power in the definition of the editorial policy of her journal. Consequently if the same scholar sits on the board of editors of two journals, those journals could have some common elements in their editorial policies. The proximity of the editorial policies of two scientific journals can be assessed by the number of common editors sitting on their boards. A database of all editors of ECONLIT journals is used. The structure of the network generated by interlocking editorship is explored by applying the instruments of network analysis. Evidence has been found of a compact network containing different components. This is interpreted as the result of a plurality of perspectives about the appropriate methods for the investigation of problems and the construction of theories within the domain of economics

Journal clustering through interlocking editorship information

“…the ratio of the actual number of edges to the maximum possible number of edges in the network) is 0.0853, which means only 8.53% edges in this network is presented (Wasserman & Faust, 1994). Compared with statistical journal interlocking editorship network in (Baccini, Barabesi, & Marcheselli, 2008) and economics journal interlocking editorship network in (Baccini & Barabesi, 2010), LIS network is denser.…”

“…All the editorial board members included in this article are those indicated officially as of December, 2009. Editors are assigned with different titles, such as editorin-chief, co-editor, associate editor, assistant editor, editorial board member, advisory board, review editor, managing editor, etc. According to Baccini and Barabesi (2010), no literature discusses the actual role of different editors of scientific journals. After consulting some professionals involved in journal publishing, some types of editors, such as managing editor, assistant editor, special issue editor, etc., are excluded from our list.…”

“…Editors are distinguished scholars in a discipline. Nearly every publisher, whose aim is to maximize the reputation and quality of the journal it publishes, tends to invite scholars with high reputations in the same area as the journal's subject to serve on its editorial board, which results in the phenomenon that one particular scholar might serve on more than one editorial boards, referred as interlocking editorship (Baccini & Barabesi, 2010) in this paper. Two Journals are interlocked via editorial board members they share, and the shared editorial board members are called co‐editors of these two journals in this paper.…”

Shaping the landscape of research in information systems from the perspective of editorial boards: A scientometric study of 77 leading journals

“…Several gatekeepers occupy more than one seat on IS editorial boards. This was documented as “interlocking editorship” by Baccini and Barabesi . Elisa Bertino serves on eight IS editorial boards, for instance.…”

Paradigm Depletion, Knowledge Production and Research Effort: Considering Thomas Kuhn's Ideas

“…They can be thought as the ones who decide the direction of research 6 . Editors set the scientific standards, choosing topics of interest, methods of analysis, and establishing the selection criteria of what constitutes new and valuable knowledge (Laband and Piette, 1994; Stigler et al ., 1995; Dalen, 1999; Chew et al ., 2007; Macdonald and Kam, 2007; Baccini and Barabesi, 2010). 7 In this paper editors can accelerate or slow down knowledge production, 8 and thus, ultimately, decide upon the life or death of a paradigm.…”