IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v25y1997i5p599-603.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An observation on publication habits based on the analysis of MS/OR journals

Author

Listed:
  • Ormerod, R. J.

Abstract

This note continues the discussion initiated by Doyle and Arthurs (Omega, 1995, 23, 257-270) on the publishing patterns of UK academics. It draws attention to a recent analysis of European MS/OR journals which gives some indication of the publication habits of authors from US institutions. On this evidence US authors account for a substantial proportion of articles in the leading European MS/OR journals. It is suggested that the explanations for the publication habits of academics need to go beyond those offered in Doyle and Arthurs and the subsequent correspondence (Omega, 1996, 24, 597-612). As measures of research quality, both citation analysis and peer reviews have their limitations. It is suggested that content analysis of journal articles may yield additional insight.

Suggested Citation

  • Ormerod, R. J., 1997. "An observation on publication habits based on the analysis of MS/OR journals," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 599-603, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:25:y:1997:i:5:p:599-603
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305-0483(97)00030-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Jones, M. J. & Brinn, T. & Pendlebury, M., 1996. "Judging the quality of research in business schools: A comment from accounting," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 597-602, October.
    2. Jones, M. J. & Brinn, T. & Pendlebury, M., 1996. "Journal evaluation methodologies: A balanced response," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 607-612, October.
    3. Doyle, J. R. & Arthurs, A. J., 1995. "Judging the quality of research in business schools: The UK as a case study," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 257-270, June.
    4. Doyle, J. R. & Arthurs, A. J. & Mcaulay, L. & Osborne, P. G., 1996. "Citation as effortful voting: A reply to ones, Brinn and Pendlebury," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 603-606, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jones, Michael John, 1999. "Critically evaluating an applications vs theory framework for research quality," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 397-401, June.
    2. Doyle, John R., 1999. "Evaluating OR/MS research," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 403-405, June.
    3. Holsapple, Clyde W. & Lee-Post, Anita, 2010. "Behavior-based analysis of knowledge dissemination channels in operations management," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(3-4), pages 167-178, June.
    4. Ormerod, R. J., 2000. "Is content analysis either practical or desirable for research evaluation?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 241-245, April.
    5. Iszan Hana Kaharudin & Mohammad Syuhaimi Ab-Rahman & Roslan Abd-Shukor & Azamin Zaharim & Mohd Jailani Mohd Nor & Ahmad Kamal Ariffin Mohd Ihsan & Shahrom Md Zain & Afiq Hipni & Kamisah Osman & Ruszym, 2022. "How Does Supervision Technique Affect Research? Towards Sustainable Performance: Publications and Students from Pure and Social Sciences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-18, May.
    6. M S Sodhi & B-G Son, 2010. "Content analysis of OR job advertisements to infer required skills," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(9), pages 1315-1327, September.
    7. R J Ormerod, 2010. "Research contribution: Citation and content analysis," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(4), pages 705-707, April.
    8. S Gattoufi & M Oral & A Kumar & A Reisman, 2004. "Content analysis of data envelopment analysis literature and its comparison with that of other OR/MS fields," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 55(9), pages 911-935, September.
    9. Donohue, Joan M. & Fox, Jeremy B., 2000. "A multi-method evaluation of journals in the decision and management sciences by US academics," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 17-36, February.
    10. Meltem Denizel & Behlul Usdiken & Deniz Tuncalp, 2003. "Drift or Shift? Continuity, Change, and International Variation in Knowledge Production in OR/MS," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 51(5), pages 711-720, October.

    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. Jones, Michael John, 1999. "Critically evaluating an applications vs theory framework for research quality," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 397-401, June.
    2. Holsapple, Clyde W. & Lee-Post, Anita, 2010. "Behavior-based analysis of knowledge dissemination channels in operations management," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(3-4), pages 167-178, June.
    3. Mitchell, George, 1996. "Judging research quality and journals: A call for debate," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 613-613, October.
    4. Ormerod, R. J., 2000. "Is content analysis either practical or desirable for research evaluation?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 241-245, April.
    5. J Mingers, 2008. "Exploring the dynamics of journal citations: Modelling with s-curves," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(8), pages 1013-1025, August.
    6. Jones, M. J. & Brinn, T. & Pendlebury, M., 1996. "Journal evaluation methodologies: A balanced response," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 607-612, October.
    7. Brinn, Tony & Jones, Michael John & Pendlebury, Maurice, 2000. "Measuring research quality: peer review 1, citation indices 0," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 237-239, April.
    8. Doyle, John R., 1999. "Evaluating OR/MS research," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 403-405, June.
    9. Rosenstreich, Daniela & Wooliscroft, Ben, 2009. "Measuring the impact of accounting journals using Google Scholar and the g-index," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 227-239.
    10. Iszan Hana Kaharudin & Mohammad Syuhaimi Ab-Rahman & Roslan Abd-Shukor & Azamin Zaharim & Mohd Jailani Mohd Nor & Ahmad Kamal Ariffin Mohd Ihsan & Shahrom Md Zain & Afiq Hipni & Kamisah Osman & Ruszym, 2022. "How Does Supervision Technique Affect Research? Towards Sustainable Performance: Publications and Students from Pure and Social Sciences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-18, May.
    11. Doyle, J. R. & Arthurs, A. J. & Mcaulay, L. & Osborne, P. G., 1996. "Citation as effortful voting: A reply to ones, Brinn and Pendlebury," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 603-606, October.
    12. Biehl, Markus & Kim, Henry & Wade, Michael, 2006. "Relationships among the academic business disciplines: a multi-method citation analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 359-371, August.
    13. Donohue, Joan M. & Fox, Jeremy B., 2000. "A multi-method evaluation of journals in the decision and management sciences by US academics," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 17-36, February.
    14. Jones, M. J. & Brinn, T. & Pendlebury, M., 1996. "Judging the quality of research in business schools: A comment from accounting," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 597-602, October.
    15. Vastag, Gyula & Montabon, Frank, 2002. "Journal characteristics, rankings and social acculturation in operations management," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 109-126, April.
    16. Doyle, John R & Arthurs, Alan J, 1998. "Grade inflation in the UK's 1996 research assessment exercise?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 461-465, August.
    17. Hussain, Simon, 2010. "Accounting journals and the ABS quality ratings," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 1-16.
    18. Tharapos, Meredith & Marriott, Neil, 2020. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder: Research quality in accounting education," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(5).
    19. Doyle, J. R. & Arthurs, A. J. & Green, R. H. & McAulay, L. & Pitt, M. R. & Bottomley, P. A. & Evans, W., 1996. "The judge, the model of the judge, and the model of the judged as judge: Analyses of the UK 1992 research assessment exercise data for business and management studies," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 13-28, February.
    20. Sahoo, Biresh & Singh, Ramadhar & Mishra, Bineet & Sankaran, Krithiga, 2015. "Research Productivity in Management Schools of India: A Directional Benefit-of-Doubt Model Analysis," MPRA Paper 67046, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:jomega:v:25:y:1997:i:5:p:599-603. 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: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    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.