IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobuve/v20y2023ics2352673423000525.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Don't always judge an article by its cover: An examination of proxies for journal impact and citations in entrepreneurship

Author

Listed:
  • Kickul, Jill
  • Griffiths, Mark
  • Brännback, Malin
  • Robb, Colleen C.

Abstract

In many academic circles, promotion and tenure decisions are often driven by the quality of the candidate's research portfolio. In entrepreneurship, as in other disciplines, we tend to judge the quality and impact of our research based on publication in a select few top journals. In our paper, we investigate the incorrect inferences that result from using Journal Impact Factor (JIF) and other rankings as proxies to assess an article's scholarly quality and impact. In doing so, we hope to better understand any discrepancies between journal quality as measured by these proxies and individual article citation rates within both top and non-top entrepreneurship journals. Our results, based upon the average number of citations, show roughly 61% of the top four journals being misidentified as high quality (Type 2 error) and 22% of the remaining journal articles being misidentified as not high quality (Type 1 error). We illustrate the variability within the top entrepreneurship journals that further reinforces the importance of evaluating each article based on its individual merits rather than relying solely on proxies of quality. As such, we avoid neglecting the potential impact and value of articles that may not conform to traditional measures of quality.

Suggested Citation

  • Kickul, Jill & Griffiths, Mark & Brännback, Malin & Robb, Colleen C., 2023. "Don't always judge an article by its cover: An examination of proxies for journal impact and citations in entrepreneurship," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 20(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobuve:v:20:y:2023:i:c:s2352673423000525
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbvi.2023.e00423
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352673423000525
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbvi.2023.e00423?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hans Landström & Gouya Harirchi, 2019. "“That’s Interesting!” in Entrepreneurship Research," Journal of Small Business Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(S2), pages 507-529, November.
    2. Meredith T Niles & Lesley A Schimanski & Erin C McKiernan & Juan Pablo Alperin, 2020. "Why we publish where we do: Faculty publishing values and their relationship to review, promotion and tenure expectations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-15, March.
    3. Stanley D. Smith, 2004. "Is an Article in a Top Journal a Top Article?," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 33(4), Winter.
    4. William H. Starbuck, 2005. "How Much Better Are the Most-Prestigious Journals? The Statistics of Academic Publication," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 180-200, April.
    5. Ramani, Ravi S. & Aguinis, Herman & Coyle-Shapiro, Jacqueline A.M., 2022. "Defining, measuring, and rewarding scholarly impact: mind the level of analysis," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 117286, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. M. Meyer & D. Libaers & B. Thijs & K. Grant & W. Glänzel & K. Debackere, 2014. "Origin and emergence of entrepreneurship as a research field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 473-485, January.
    7. Christopher Wickert & Corinne Post & Jonathan P. Doh & John E. Prescott & Andrea Prencipe, 2021. "Management Research that Makes a Difference: Broadening the Meaning of Impact," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 297-320, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nianhang Xu & Winnie P. H. Poon & Kam C. Chan, 2014. "Contributing Institutions and Authors in International Business Research: A Quality-Based Assessment," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 54(5), pages 735-755, October.
    2. Brian L. Dos Santos & Clyde W. Holsapple & Qian Ye, 2011. "The Intellectual Influence of Entrepreneurship Journals: A Network Analysis," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 35(4), pages 735-754, July.
    3. David L. Anderson & John Tressler, 2013. "The Relevance of the “h-” and “g-” Index to Economics in the Context of A Nation-Wide Research Evaluation Scheme: The New Zealand Case," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 32(1), pages 81-94, March.
    4. Tomas Karlsson & Caroline Wigren, 2012. "Start-ups among university employees: the influence of legitimacy, human capital and social capital," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 297-312, June.
    5. Currie, Russell R. & Pandher, Gurupdesh S., 2011. "Finance journal rankings and tiers: An Active Scholar Assessment methodology," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 7-20, January.
    6. João Faria & Rajeev Goel, 2010. "Returns to networking in academia," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 103-117, July.
    7. Jasper Brinkerink, 2023. "When Shooting for the Stars Becomes Aiming for Asterisks: P-Hacking in Family Business Research," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 47(2), pages 304-343, March.
    8. Mike W. Peng, 2019. "Global competition and diffusion of the “A” list," Frontiers of Business Research in China, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-23, December.
    9. Jerome K. Vanclay, 2012. "Impact factor: outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(2), pages 211-238, August.
    10. Bastian, Bob & Zucchella, Antonella, 2023. "Nascent entrepreneurs during start-up competitions: Between beauty contests and co-created problematization," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 20(C).
    11. John Tressler & David L. Anderson, 2012. "Citations as a Measure of the Research Outputs of New Zealand's Economics Departments: The Problem of 'Long and Variable Lags'," Agenda - A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics, vol. 19(1), pages 17-40.
    12. Lyudmyla Shkulipa, 2021. "Evaluation of accounting journals by coverage of accounting topics in 2018–2019," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7251-7327, September.
    13. Meyer, Matthias & Waldkirch, Rüdiger W. & Duscher, Irina & Just, Alexander, 2018. "Drivers of citations: An analysis of publications in “top” accounting journals," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 24-46.
    14. Daniel E. O'Leary, 2009. "Downloads and citations in Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(1‐2), pages 21-31, January.
    15. Anne-Wil Harzing & Wilfred Mijnhardt, 2015. "Proof over promise: towards a more inclusive ranking of Dutch academics in Economics & Business," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 727-749, January.
    16. Oswald, Andrew J., 2015. "The Objective Measurement of World-Leading Research," IZA Discussion Papers 8829, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Benson Honig & Joseph Lampel & Donald Siegel & Paul Drnevich, 2014. "Ethics in the Production and Dissemination of Management Research: Institutional Failure or Individual Fallibility?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 118-142, January.
    18. Kam C. Chan & Anna Fung & Hung-Gay Fung & Jot Yau, 2016. "A Citation Analysis of Business Ethics Research: A Global Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 136(3), pages 557-573, July.
    19. Erich Battistin & Marco Ovidi, 2022. "Rising Stars: Expert Reviews and Reputational Yardsticks in the Research Excellence Framework," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 89(356), pages 830-848, October.
    20. Daniel Sgroi & Andrew J. Oswald, 2013. "How Should Peer‐review Panels Behave?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0, pages 255-278, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobuve:v:20:y:2023:i:c:s2352673423000525. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-business-venturing-insights .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.