What are we really evaluating when we rank journals : Comparisons of views

Abstract

\n\t\t\t\t\tThis paper examines differences in academics perceptions of how journals should be evaluated in terms of their prestige, contribution to theory, contribution to practice and contribution to teaching. Comparisons are made between individual and institutional weightings, regional variations and whether an individual works at an institution offering a PhD/DBA. Some differences were identified, suggesting that that evaluative criteria used to rank journal may be influenced by employment situations. \n\t\t\t\t

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 16 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.