#29568
Scholarly communication through Open Access (OA) journals has become a global phenomenon. This article reports on a study that measures the value of OA journals based on citation counts (ISI's Journal Impact Factor). It compares three highly ranked commercial electronic journals to five OA electronic journals. The non-OA journals are MIS Quarterly, Journal of American Medication Informatics Association, and Annual Review of Information Science and Technology; the five OA journals are Ariadne, D-Lib Magazine, First Monday, Information Research, and Information Technology and Disabilities. The criteria are established by ten major databases: Thompson's ISI, American Psychological Association's PsycInfo, Latin American and Canadian Health Science's LILCS, National Medical Library's MEDLINE, Scientific Electronic Library's SciELO, The IOWA Guide, CSA's LISA, EBSCO's LISTA, H.W. Wilson's Library Literature and Information Science, and R.R. Bowker's Ulrich International Periodical Directory. These basic criteria are categorized under 11 broad issues: availability, authority and review policy, scope and coverage, exhaustiveness of articles, page format, availability of hyperlinks, currency, updating policy, search facility, and other miscellaneous issues. Ten years' growth of Library and Information Science (LIS) OA journals has been measured by counting articles manually. During the last ten years the highest number of articles was published by First Monday, followed by D-Lib Magazine and Ariadne; the average number of articles per issue reported in Ariadne ranks first.
Mukherjee, Bhaskar. Journal of Electronic Publishing (2007). Articles>Publishing>Research>Assessment
#29756
The Impact of Perceptions of Journal Quality on Business and Management Communication Academics 
This commentary describes and critiques criteria that, according to results from an Association for Business Communication (ABC) member survey, are having an impact on quality judgments about our journals. ABC members rank the Journal of Business Communication and Business Communication Quarterly as top research and pedagogical journals in business/management communication, a finding corroborated by a larger study of academics in business and technical communication. However, the growing importance of citation counts and journal rankings currently disadvantages our journals, presenting us with professional obligations and personal dilemmas in relation to them. The authors' purpose is to raise awareness of the various determinants of perceptions of journal quality, to explore the communal views of ABC members on this issue, and to seek ways of enhancing the value of business/management communication research in the academic marketplace.
Rogers, Priscilla S., Nittaya Campbell, Leena Louhiala-Salminen, Kathy Rent and Jim Suchan. JBC (2007). Articles>Publishing>Research>Assessment
#34854
Symbolic Capital and Academic Fields: An Alternative Discourse on Journal Rankings
During my 30 years in the academy, I have seen universities subject to increased demands for accountability. These demands from both internal and external publics translate into added attention to quality assessment. To evaluate teaching, universities measure student learning outcomes and rely on standardized scores as indicators of teaching effectiveness. To assess research productivity, departments document publications that appear in top-ranked journals and presses and track dollar amounts raised through external funding. This focus on evaluation, in turn, lends new credence to independent ranking systems that provide unbiased indices of quality. An unintended consequence of these academic norms, however, is the pattern of treating standards as objective indices rather than practical guidelines.
Putnam, Linda L. Management Communication Quarterly (2009). Articles>Research>Publishing>Assessment
#34857
Journal Rankings and Academic Research: Two Discourses About the Quality of Faculty Work
Peer evaluation is the hallmark of the academic profession. Hiring, advancement, and reputation in the university setting have traditionally depended on a scholar's work as judged by his or her colleagues. The emerging trend toward journal ranking as an indicator of research accomplishment poses an important challenge to professional academic standards and to higher education generally because ranking schemes diminish the professoriate and degrade knowledge work. We argue that when scholarly journals are ranked in terms of their desirability as publication outlets they take on the characteristics of commodities.
Hogler, Raymond and Michael A. Gross. Management Communication Quarterly (2009). Articles>Publishing>Research>Assessment
