Using the h-index to measure the quality of journals in the field of business and management

Abstract

This paper considers the use of the h-index as a measure of a journal's research quality and contribution. We study a sample of 455 journals in business and management all of which are included in the ISI Web of Science (WoS) and the Association of Business School's peer review journal ranking list. The h-index is compared with both the traditional impact factors, and with the peer review judgements. We also consider two sources of citation datathe WoS itself and Google Scholar. The conclusions are that the h-index is preferable to the impact factor for a variety of reasons, especially the selective coverage of the impact factor and the fact that it disadvantages journals that publish many papers. Google Scholar is also preferred to WoS as a data source. However, the paper notes that it is not sufficient to use any single metric to properly evaluate research achievements.

A review of theory and practice in scientometrics

“…There have been several studies of the use of the h-index in business and management fields such as information systems (Oppenheim, 2007;Truex III et al, 2009), management science (Mingers, 2008b;Mingers et al, 2012), consumer research (Saad, 2006), Marketing (Moussa & Touzani, 2010) and business (Harzing & Van der Wal, 2009). …”

“…The h-index (Costas & Bordons, 2007;Egghe, 2010;Glänzel, 2006;Hirsch, 2005;Mingers, 2008b;Mingers et al, 2012) is one that has become particularly prominent, now available automatically in the databases. It is transparent and robust but there are many criticisms of its biases.…”

Identifying Research Topic Development in Business and Management Education Research Using Legitimation Code Theory

“…We used h-index scores calculated by Publish or Perish/Google Scholar over those by Web of Science/SSCI because initial studies suggest that these may be preferable data sources for bibliometric studies in business and educational research (Mingers, Macri, & Petrovici, 2012;Van Aalst, 2010).…”

Bibliometric evaluation vs. informed peer review: Evidence from Italy

“…Data were collected in April 2012 and checked throughout May 2012. 14 See, e.g., Mingers et al (2012) for Management, Linnemer and Combes (2010) for Economics, and Jacobs (2011) for Sociology. For a comparison between WoS and Google Scholar see Harzing and van der Wal (2008).…”