Is Microsoft Academic a viable citation source for ranking marketing journals?

Moussa, Salim

doi:10.1108/ajim-03-2019-0070

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some authors have also proposed the age of a journal as an indicator of its quality (Baumgartner and Pieters, 2003;Touzani and Moussa, 2010;Moussa, 2019). Established journals have a long tradition of publishing research outputs.…”

Section: Citation Contamination As a Journal Quality Issue: Hypothesis Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The only citation source that covers predatory journals is Google Scholar (Moussa, 2021a). Google's scholarly search engine also covers the entirety of the 68 CABS-listed, peer-reviewed marketing journals (Moussa, 2019). It should be stressed that Google Scholar was used as a citation gathering tool, not as a citation source.…”

Section: Citations Gathering Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Contamination by citations: references to predatory journals in the peer-reviewed marketing literature

Moussa¹

2021

SAJM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposePredatory publishing is a growing and global issue infecting all scientific domains. Predatory publishers create counterfeit, not (properly) peer-reviewed journals to exploit the open access (OA) model in which the author pays. The plethora of predatory marketing journals along with the sophisticated deceptive practices of their publishers may create total confusion. One of the many highly likely risks of that bewilderment is when peer-reviewed, prestigious marketing journals cite these pseudo-marketing journals. This phenomenon is called citation contamination. This study aims to investigate the extent of citation contamination in the peer-reviewed marketing literature.Design/methodology/approachUsing Google Scholar as a citation gathering tool, this study investigates references to four predatory marketing journals in 68 peer-reviewed marketing journals listed in the 2018 version of the Academic Journal Guide by the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CABSs).FindingsResults indicate that 59 of the 68 CABS-ranked peer-reviewed marketing journals were, up to late January 2021, contaminated by at least one of the four sampled predatory journals. Together, these four pseudo-journals received (at least) 605 citations. Findings from nonparametric statistical procedures show that citation contamination occurred irrespective of the age of a journal or its 2019 Journal Impact Factor (JIF). They also point out that citation contamination happened independently from the fact that a journal is recognized by Clarivate Analytics or not.Research limitations/implicationsThis study investigated citations to only four predatory marketing journals in only 68 CABS-listed peer-reviewed marketing journals.Practical implicationsThese findings should sound an alarm to the entire marketing community (including academics and practitioners). To counteract citation contamination, recommendations are provided for researchers, practitioners, journal editors and academic and professional associations.Originality/valueThis study is the first to offer a systematic assessment of references to predatory journals in the peer-reviewed marketing literature.

show abstract

Section: Citation Contamination As a Journal Quality Issue: Hypothesis Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Citations Gathering Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contamination by citations: references to predatory journals in the peer-reviewed marketing literature

Moussa¹

2021

SAJM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Having been founded in 1974, the Journal of Consumer Research (JCR) is the most prestigious/influential consumer behavior journal (Moussa, 2019;Wang et al, 2015). Several studies have conducted bibliometric analyses of the JCR over the last four decades (e.g., Leong, 1989;Hoffman & Holbrook, 1993;Wang et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Celebrating Failure: Learning lessons from a leading consumer behavior journal’s retractions

Moussa

2022

CBR

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A retraction is the removal of a published article from the scientific record. It is an admission of failure. Yet, every retraction, regardless of its cause(s), is instructive. Using the oxymoron/concept of celebrating failure, this study investigates retractions in the Journal of Consumer Research (JCR). Method: The content of each JCR retraction notice was examined to determine the initiator(s) of the retraction, retractors, reason(s) for retraction, and time-toretraction. Findings: According to the findings, JCR issued ten retraction notices between June 2012 and October 2020. The ten retraction notices generated together, and up to April 11, 2022, some 18,378 pageviews, 3,944 PDF Resumo Objetivo: Uma retratação é a remoção de um artigo publicado do registro científico. É uma admissão de fracasso. No entanto, toda retratação, independentemente de sua(s) causa(s), é instrutiva. Usando o oxímoro/conceito de celebrar o fracasso, este estudo investiga retratações no Journal of Consumer Research (JCR). Método: O conteúdo de cada aviso de retração do JCR foi examinado para determinar o(s) iniciador(es) da retração, os responsáveis pela retratação, os motivo(s) para retração e tempo para retração. Resultados: De acordo com as descobertas, a JCR emitiu dez avisos de retratação entre junho de 2012 e outubro de 2020. Os dez avisos de retratação geraram juntos, e até 11 Consumer Behavior Review, 6(1) e-254032downloads, and a total Altmetric Attention Score of 36. The authors of the retracted articles initiated four of the ten retraction processes. The retractors were the authors in five of the cases. The most common reason for retraction, with five occurrences, is "data and analysis anomalies". It took 947.6 days on average for a JCR retracted article to be withdrawn. Originality: Instead of pointing fingers and assigning blame, a list of ten lessons learned based on these findings is dressed up. These lessons apply to the JCR and its entire ecosystem, including authors, editors, peer reviewers, readers, its owner, and publisher. Keywords: Retraction; Journal of Consumer Research; failure; lessons learned de abril de 2022, cerca de 18.378 pageviews, 3.944 downloads de PDF e uma pontuação total de atenção Altmetric de 36. Os autores dos artigos retratados iniciaram quatro dos dez processos de retratação. Os responsáveis pelas retratações foram os autores em cinco dos casos. O motivo mais comum de retratação, com cinco ocorrências, são "anomalias de dados e análises". Demorou 947,6 dias em média para que um artigo JCR retratado fosse retirado. Originalidade: Em vez de apontar o dedo e atribuir culpa, uma lista de dez lições aprendidas com base nessas descobertas é elaborada. Essas lições se aplicam ao JCR e a todo o seu ecossistema, incluindo autores, editores, revisores, leitores, seu proprietário e editor.

show abstract

“…The results in these tabs can be filtered and sorted just like the search results. Many studies in the past have noted or commented on incorrect years of publication assigned to some publications (Harzing 2016;Moussa 2019). Microsoft Academic addresses this issue in its FAQ, stating the discrepancy is due to the fact that it collects the first date it finds attached to the publication.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Numerous articles have been written comparing the search capabilities and content of Microsoft Academic's earlier iterations to Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar. The author will leave to others the in-depth analysis to determine if Microsoft Academic still outperforms Scopus and Web of Science (Harzing 2016;Harzing & Alakangas 2017a;Harzing & Alakangas 2017b; and underperforms or is comparable to Google Scholar (Harzing 2016;Harzing & Alakangas 2017a;Harzing & Alakangas 2017b;Moussa 2019;Orduña-Malea et al 2014;Ortega & Aguillo 2014). While it remains to be seen if the machine learning semantic search engine will live up to expectations, hopefully this brief overview will be of use to anyone exploring the database for the first time or visiting again after a hiatus.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%