IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v126y2021i1d10.1007_s11192-020-03770-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A TOPSIS model for understanding the authors choice of journal selection

Author

Listed:
  • Zeynep Didem Unutmaz Durmuşoğlu

    (Gaziantep University)

  • Alptekin Durmuşoğlu

    (Gaziantep University)

Abstract

Subsequent to preparation of an article, authors start to look for a suitable journal to submit. Authors are assumed to select the journals by considering their future expectations regarding the maximization of prospective impact of the study, increasing the probability of acceptance and minimizing the total time consumed until the paper is published. Furthermore, the scope of a candidate journal should be in line with paper’s content. Currently, it is possible to find these journal related facts (such as average waiting times, acceptance rates, impact factor and etc.) on the web pages of the journals. However, the exact effect of these factors, and how to incorporate them into modeling, are yet unclear; further research is required to explore them. On the other hand, we know that Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) can be a useful approach to rank the journal alternatives. We require corresponding weights of factors to obtain a complete decision making model. If the correct weights of these factors for such a TOPSIS model can be estimated, we can understand the magnitude of their corresponding effects. Thereby, we can explain the journal selection decision by using an analytical approach. Therefore, the main purpose of this paper is to find appropriate weights of these factors that can explain why already published papers were submitted to their current journals. To the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first to search for weight of factors in TOPSIS, where the actual decisions are known a priori. For testing purposes, we create our data set by collecting the already published papers (in year 2019) which has the “environmental risk” term at the title/abstract or keywords. We test different TOPSIS models (with different random weights) for each of the papers and the rank the journal alternatives. If the first, second and the third journal alternative is the actual journal that published the paper, we assume that the model predicts accurately. As a conclusion, the TOPSIS model which predicts the journal for the published papers much more accurately is accepted as the valid decision making model. Inevitably, we have certain assumptions regarding to this model. We assume that the authors are informed about the journal facts and make rational decisions about journal selection.

Suggested Citation

  • Zeynep Didem Unutmaz Durmuşoğlu & Alptekin Durmuşoğlu, 2021. "A TOPSIS model for understanding the authors choice of journal selection," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 521-543, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-020-03770-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-020-03770-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-020-03770-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-020-03770-5?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. Rier, David A., 2004. "Audience, consequence, and journal selection in toxic-exposure epidemiology," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 59(7), pages 1541-1546, October.
    2. Bryce, Cormac & Dowling, Michael & Lucey, Brian, 2020. "The journal quality perception gap," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
    3. Sugimoto, Cassidy R. & Larivière, Vincent & Ni, Chaoqun & Cronin, Blaise, 2013. "Journal acceptance rates: A cross-disciplinary analysis of variability and relationships with journal measures," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 897-906.
    4. Brinn, Tony & Jones, Michael John, 2008. "The determinants of a successful accounting manuscript: Views of the informed," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 89-113.
    5. Vogel, Rick & Hattke, Fabian & Petersen, Jessica, 2017. "Journal rankings in management and business studies: What rules do we play by?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1707-1722.
    6. Kapeller, Jakob & Steinerberger, Stefan, 2016. "Emergent phenomena in scientific publishing: A simulation exercise," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 1945-1952.
    7. Oster, Sharon, 1980. "The Optimal Order for Submitting Manuscripts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 444-448, June.
    8. Azar, Ofer H., 2007. "Behavioral economics and socio-economics journals: A citation-based ranking," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 451-462, June.
    9. Derek Leslie, 2005. "Are Delays in Academic Publishing Necessary?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(1), pages 407-413, March.
    10. Tony Brinn & Michael John Jones, 2008. "The determinants of a successful accounting manuscript: Views of the informed," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(2), pages 89-113, June.
    11. Jayson L. Lusk & M. Darren Hudson, 2009. "Submission Patterns, Submission Policies, and Revealed Preferences for Agricultural Economics Journals," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 31(4), pages 695-711.
    12. Santiago Salinas & Stephan B Munch, 2015. "Where Should I Send It? Optimizing the Submission Decision Process," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(1), pages 1-11, January.
    13. William H. Walters & Susanne Markgren, 2019. "Do faculty journal selections correspond to objective indicators of citation impact? Results for 20 academic departments at Manhattan College," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 321-337, January.
    14. Frank L DuBois & David Reeb, 2000. "Ranking the International Business Journals," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 31(4), pages 689-704, December.
    15. Heintzelman Martin & Nocetti Diego, 2009. "Where Should we Submit our Manuscript? An Analysis of Journal Submission Strategies," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-28, September.
    16. Aderemi Oluyinka Adewumi & Peter Ayokunle Popoola, 2018. "A multi-objective particle swarm optimization for the submission decision process," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 9(1), pages 98-110, February.
    17. Michael D. Robinson, 1991. "Applied bibliometrics: Using citation analysis in the journal submission process," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 42(4), pages 308-310, May.
    18. Tony E Wong & Vivek Srikrishnan & David Hadka & Klaus Keller, 2017. "A multi-objective decision-making approach to the journal submission problem," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(6), pages 1-19, June.
    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. Jeppe Nicolaisen & Tove Faber Frandsen, 2022. "Epistemic community formation: a bibliometric study of recurring authors in medical journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(7), pages 4167-4189, July.

    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. Damien Besancenot & João Ricardo Faria & Franklin G. Mixon, 2017. "Academic Research and the Strategic Interaction of Scholars and Editors: A Two-Stage Game," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(01), pages 1-16, March.
    2. Sascha Baghestanian & Sergey V. Popov, 2018. "On publication, refereeing and working hard," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(4), pages 1419-1459, November.
    3. Damien Besancenot & Kim Huynh & Joao Faria, 2012. "Search and research: the influence of editorial boards on journals’ quality," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 73(4), pages 687-702, October.
    4. Tony E Wong & Vivek Srikrishnan & David Hadka & Klaus Keller, 2017. "A multi-objective decision-making approach to the journal submission problem," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(6), pages 1-19, June.
    5. Frank Mueller‐Langer & Richard Watt, 2021. "Optimal pricing and quality of academic journals and the ambiguous welfare effects of forced open access: A two‐sided model," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(8), pages 1945-1959, December.
    6. Yuqing Zheng & Harry M. Kaiser, 2016. "Submission Demand In Core Economics Journals: A Panel Study," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 54(2), pages 1319-1338, April.
    7. Damien Besancenot & Kim Huynh & Radu Vranceanu, 2011. "A Matching Model of the Academic Publication Market," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 167(4), pages 708-725, December.
    8. Ofer H. Azar & David M. Brock, 2008. "A Citation‐Based Ranking of Strategic Management Journals," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(3), pages 781-802, September.
    9. Giuseppe Pernagallo, 2023. "Science in the mist: A model of asymmetric information for the research market," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(2), pages 390-415, May.
    10. Auschra, Carolin & Bartosch, Julia & Lohmeyer, Nora, 2022. "Differences in female representation in leading management and organization journals: Establishing a benchmark," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    11. Domingo Docampo & Vicente Safón, 2021. "Journal ratings: a paper affiliation methodology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 8063-8090, September.
    12. Barbos, Andrei, 2013. "Project screening with tiered evaluation," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 293-306.
    13. Chengguang Li & Jungsoo Ahn & Juan Bu & Klaus E. Meyer, 2023. "The value of publishing in JIBS," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 54(9), pages 1688-1699, December.
    14. Paola Ramassa & Francesco Avallone & Alberto Quagli, 2024. "Can “publishing game” pressures affect the research topic choice? A survey of European accounting researchers," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 28(2), pages 507-542, June.
    15. Geert Van Campenhout & Tom Van Caneghem, 2010. "Article Contribution and Subsequent Citation Rates: Evidence from European Accounting Review," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 837-855.
    16. Heintzelman Martin & Nocetti Diego, 2009. "Where Should we Submit our Manuscript? An Analysis of Journal Submission Strategies," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-28, September.
    17. João Lunkes Rogério & Ripoll Feliu Vicente M. & Silva Da Rosa Fabricia, 2012. "Pesquisa científica em contabilidade gerencial: estudo comparativo entre Espanha e Brasil," Contaduría y Administración, Accounting and Management, vol. 57(2), pages 159-184, abril-jun.
    18. Leonid Tiokhin & Minhua Yan & Thomas J. H. Morgan, 2021. "Competition for priority harms the reliability of science, but reforms can help," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 5(7), pages 857-867, July.
    19. Azar Ofer H., 2015. "A Model of the Academic Review Process with Informed Authors," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 15(2), pages 865-889, April.
    20. Bryce, Cormac & Dowling, Michael & Lucey, Brian, 2020. "The journal quality perception gap," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Journal selection; TOPSIS; Weight search;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D70 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - General
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-020-03770-5. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.