“…Other researchers have focused on the contributors themselves seeking to evaluate both individual productivity (Howard and Nikolai, 1983; Heck, Cooley and Hubbard, 1986; Heck and Bremser, 1986; and Heck, Jensen and Cooley, 1990), and institutional productivity (Klemkosy and Tuttle, 1973; Andrews and McKensie, 1978; Windal, 1981; Dyl and Lilly, 1985; Heck and Bremser, 1986; Heck, Cooley and Hubbard, 1986; Niemi, 1987; Heck, Jensen and Cooley, 1991; Zivney and Bertin, 1992; Hasselback and Reinstein, 1995; Borokhovich, Bricker, Brunarski and Simkins, 1995; and Zivney, Bertin and Gavin, 1995). Still more studies have focused upon other aspects of publication and productivity, such as quality of doctoral programs (Bazley and Nikoloi, 1975); factors contributing to published research (Cargile and Bublitz, 1986); measures of research productivity (Bublitz and Kee, 1984); time‐delay in doctoral productivity (Jacobs, Hartgraves and Beard, 1986); bibliometric distributions (Chung and Cox, 1990); promotion (Schroeder and Saftner, 1989); realistic research expectations (Rouse and Stockley, 1984); origin of research, data and journal (Lukka and Kasanen, 1996); and finance professors’ research standards (Fishe, 1998).…”