The superstar phenomenon in the knowledge management and intellectual capital academic discipline

Serenko, Alexander; Cox, Raymond A. K.; Bontis, Nick; Booker, Lorne D.

doi:10.1016/j.joi.2011.01.005

Cited by 30 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The examination of profession‐specific journals can assist in our understanding of scholarship, and this study suggests that radiography, as represented by the four international journals, does not match the distribution of author productivity expected by Lotka's law when whole author count is used. It appears disappointing that only 22.5% of senior authors published more than one article, although this is broadly in line with the expected level established from the calculations and is consistent with other studies . More important is to recognize that across four journals and 8 years, 20% of the publications in this study (167 unique articles) were written by only 3% of the journal contributors.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…It is interesting to note that a large number of the most prolific authors are involved in the leadership of the journals studied, including current or previous editors‐in‐chief, including French ( JMIRS ), Bentley and Hogg ( Radiography ), and a further 12 are members of one or more of the journal editorial boards. It has previously been suggested that editorial appointments are an acknowledgement of the most productive or influential researchers and that a consequence of such roles may result in these individuals being more successful …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An evaluation of author productivity in international radiography journals 2004–2011

Snaith

2013

J of Medical Radiation Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionRadiography, the allied health profession, has changed beyond recognition over the last century; however, in academic terms radiography is a relatively young profession. It is therefore still establishing its professional knowledge base. This article uses peer-review author productivity distribution to evaluate its scholarly maturity.MethodsFour peer-reviewed journals in medical radiation sciences were examined over an 8-year period (2004–2011) and author productivity was compared to Lotka's law. Further analysis of the most prolific authors provided an evaluation of their characteristics.ResultsThe 1306 unique authors contributed 835 articles during the study period. Of these, 1012 (77.5%) contributed only one article to the journals studied, with an inverse power relationship of author productivity. At the 0.1 level of significance, radiography does not fit Lotka's law (n = −2.334; c = 0.712; Dmax = 0.0627; Critical threshold = 0.0337). There was a significant correlation between the most prolific authors and collaboration (P = 0.002), although variation was noted in author discipline and location.ConclusionsThe results of this study add to the discussion of radiography scholarship and demonstrate that the radiography authors have similar productivity distribution to other professions, but do not follow Lotka's law.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An evaluation of author productivity in international radiography journals 2004–2011

Snaith

2013

J of Medical Radiation Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Scholarly interest in the skewness of science and high individual research performance has grown exponentially in the last few years. Highly productive academic scientists have mostly been studied intra‐nationally and within single disciplines (notably economics and psychology), including studies of star scientists (Abramo, D'Angelo, & Caprasecca, ; Yair, Gueta, & Davidovitch, ), star performers (Aguinis & O'Boyle, ) and superstars (Agrawal, McHale, & Oettl, ; Serenko, Cox, Bontis, & Booker, ).…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social stratification in Higher Education: What it means at the micro‐level of the individual academic scientist

Kwiek¹

2019

Higher Education Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The academic profession is internally divided as never before. This cross‐national comparative analysis of stratification in Higher Education is based on a sample of European academic scientists (N = 8,466) from universities in 11 countries. The analysis identifies three types of stratification: academic performance stratification, academic salary stratification, and international research stratification. This emergent stratification of the global scientific community is predominantly research‐based, and internationalisation in research is at its centre; prestige‐driven, internationally competitive, and central to academic recognition systems, research is the single most stratifying factor in Higher Education at the level of the individual scientist today. These stratification processes pull the various segments of the academic profession in different directions. The study analyses highly productive academics (‘research top performers’), highly paid academics (‘academic top earners’), and highly internationalised academics (‘research internationalists’) and explores the implications for individual scientists.

show abstract

“…On one hand, the user can find more niche (unpopular) doctors at much lower searching costs than ever before, creating a “Long Tail” in the concentration of demand for doctors. On the other hand, users can more easily find the most high-profile doctors online, creating “Superstar” or “winner-take-all” markets where some very good doctors dominate the market [19]. However, we have no idea whether the E-consultation market will be more of a superstar market or a long-tail market compared with a traditional offline context.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of the Internet on Health Consultation Market Concentration: An Econometric Analysis of Secondary Data

Jia¹,

Zhang²,

Ma³

et al. 2016

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundMany markets have traditionally been dominated by a few best-selling products, and this is also the case for the health care industry. However, we do not know whether the market will be more or less concentrated when health care services are delivered online (known as E-consultation), nor do we know how to reduce the concentration of the E-consultation market.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate the concentration of the E-consultation market and how to reduce its concentration through information disclosure mechanisms (online reputation and self-representation).MethodsWe employed a secondary data econometric analysis using transaction data obtained from an E-consultation Website (haodf.com) for three diseases (infantile pneumonia, diabetes, and pancreatic cancer) from 2008 to 2015. We included 2439 doctors in the analysis.ResultsThe E-consultation market largely follows the 20/80 principle, namely that approximately 80% of orders are fulfilled by nearly 20% of doctors. This is much higher than the offline health care market. Meanwhile, the market served by doctors with strong online reputations (beta=0.207, P<.001) or strong online self-representation (beta=0.386, P<.001) is less concentrated.ConclusionsWhen health care services are delivered online, the market will be more concentrated (known as the “Superstar” effect), indicating poor service efficiency for society as a whole. To reduce market concentration, E-consultation websites should provide important design elements such as ratings of doctors (user feedback), articles contributed by doctors, and free consultation services (online representation). A possible and important way to reduce the market concentration of the E-consultation market is to accumulate enough highly rated or highly self-represented doctors.

show abstract

The superstar phenomenon in the knowledge management and intellectual capital academic discipline

Cited by 30 publications

References 47 publications

An evaluation of author productivity in international radiography journals 2004–2011

An evaluation of author productivity in international radiography journals 2004–2011

Social stratification in Higher Education: What it means at the micro‐level of the individual academic scientist

The Impact of the Internet on Health Consultation Market Concentration: An Econometric Analysis of Secondary Data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About