What are we really evaluating when we rank journals : Comparisons of views
Polonsky, Michael Jay and Whitelaw, Paul 2003, What are we really evaluating when we rank journals : Comparisons of views, in ANZMAC 2003 : a celebrations of Ehrenberg and Bass : marketing discoveries, knowledge and contribution, conference proceedings, University of South Australia, Adelaide, S.A., pp. 1374-1380.
This 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.
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in Deakin Research Online is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.
Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO.
If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact email@example.com.