How can arts and social science faculty show their quality to be just as high as STEM? One of the things that becomes clear when you spend any time engaged in the promotions or hiring process of universities is that there is an increased drive towards metric. This has spread from the STEM area to the AHSS areas .
Another that becomes clear is that when one is looking across faculties and areas, with the best will in the world the old adage “what gets measured gets managed” is in operation, except “what gets measured gets promoted” may be a better conceptualisation. Regardless of what anyone in a meeting or a letter says, a group of disparate assessors, including perhaps people from outside the academy who are unclear of the nuances of citation and influences, they will be in my experience more swayed towards the candidates with “more better”. Lets leave aside the issue of whether or not citations mean anything in terms of impact (my view, something but not as much as we might think).
We need, us in AHSS disciplines, to be able to benchmark our work against our STEM colleagues. Decry it as we migh, but Google is the king of big data. Google scholar is fast becoming as essential a search and bibilometric tool as any of the longer established publisher led databases. Where it excels is in its breadth, and this perhaps can be a flaw. Googlebots scour the web for citations, and aggregates them. They have recently published the 2014 journal rankings (yep, just what we need…more rankings…). Its breadth can mean that it is capturing citations to grey literature and so forth but hey, its breadth means it is capturing citations in a much wider manner than otherwise. One of the saddest letters I saw was from a very well known macroeconomist who stated that only papers in journals in the Journal Citation Reports mattered. This is delusional, and dangerously so, ignoring as it does the pattern of citation and influence. Needless to say this letter was taken seriously by the STEM based members of a panel, disregarding the fact that there are many many more, proportionally, STEM journals than AHSS journals in TR citations. Such are why we need to cast our net widely.
The graph below shows starkly the two areas. AHSS journals, all bar the top 6 business, economic and management ones, have lower h-indices. A h-index of 20 for a journal means that 20 articles in that journal have been cited at least 20 times. Here it is actually a h-5 index, so it looks at the last 5 years only.
Clearly the top STEM journals cite more and more often than the top AHSS journals. All things being equal therefore a publication or an author in these STEM journals will have a higher h index than one in AHSS journals. This doesn’t mean that they are better – it means they operate in a different context to AHSS. That’s all.
Assuming that for the moment we are concerned with simple rankings, we should therefore be able to consider benchmarking. A publication in the second ranked BusEcoMgt journal (American Economic Review) ‘=’ one in The Lancet = one in Language Learning the second ranked in humanities and arts. Instead in other words of getting hung up on the cardinality of the journal metrics we should look at the ordinarily of them.
Table 1 : h5 Indices of top 20 journals
All |
Bus, Eco, Mgmt |
Chem and Material |
|||
Nature |
355 |
NBER Working Papers |
168 |
Chemical Reviews |
193 |
The New England Journal of Medicine |
329 |
The American Economic Review |
122 |
Journal of the American Chemical Society |
190 |
Science |
311 |
Review of Financial Studies |
116 |
Chemical Society reviews |
176 |
The Lancet |
248 |
The Journal of Finance |
107 |
Nano Letters |
174 |
Cell |
223 |
CEPR Discussion Papers |
105 |
Advanced Materials |
173 |
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences |
217 |
Journal of Financial Economics |
101 |
Angewandte Chemie International Edition |
171 |
Journal of Clinical Oncology |
205 |
The Quarterly Journal of Economics |
91 |
ACS Nano |
149 |
Chemical Reviews |
193 |
IZA Discussion Papers |
81 |
Nature Materials |
146 |
Physical Review Letters |
191 |
Econometrica |
75 |
Nature Nanotechnology |
136 |
Journal of the American Chemical Society |
190 |
Management Information Systems Quarterly |
72 |
Accounts of Chemical Research |
127 |
Nature Genetics |
188 |
Academy of Management Journal |
72 |
Biomaterials |
118 |
JAMA |
181 |
Strategic Management Journal |
70 |
The Journal of Physical Chemistry C |
115 |
Circulation |
178 |
Journal of Business Ethics |
70 |
Journal of Biological Chemistry |
114 |
Chemical Society reviews |
176 |
Organization Science |
68 |
Advanced Functional Materials |
111 |
Nano Letters |
174 |
Journal of Management |
67 |
Energy & Environmental Science |
111 |
Advanced Materials |
173 |
Review of Economics and Statistics |
67 |
Journal of Materials Chemistry |
110 |
Angewandte Chemie International Edition |
171 |
Journal of Banking & Finance |
66 |
Chemical communications (Cambridge, England) |
110 |
NBER Working Papers |
168 |
Journal of Marketing |
65 |
Chemistry of Materials |
107 |
Nucleic Acids Research |
164 |
The Review of Economic Studies |
65 |
Journal of Hazardous Materials |
106 |
Journal of the American College of Cardiology |
162 |
The Economic Journal |
63 |
Analytical Chemistry |
102 |
Engineerign |
Medical |
Social Science |
|||
Nano Letters |
174 |
The New England Journal of Medicine |
329 |
Computers & Education |
81 |
Advanced Materials |
173 |
The Lancet |
248 |
Health Affairs |
77 |
ACS Nano |
149 |
Cell |
223 |
Research Policy |
73 |
Nature Materials |
146 |
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences |
217 |
Journal of Business Ethics |
70 |
Nature Nanotechnology |
136 |
Journal of Clinical Oncology |
205 |
American Journal of Public Health |
69 |
Nature Photonics |
122 |
Nature Genetics |
188 |
Global Environmental Change |
66 |
IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, CVPR |
118 |
JAMA |
181 |
Social Science & Medicine |
65 |
The Journal of Physical Chemistry C |
115 |
Circulation |
178 |
American Political Science Review |
54 |
Advanced Functional Materials |
111 |
Journal of the American College of Cardiology |
162 |
American Journal of Political Science |
53 |
Energy & Environmental Science |
111 |
Blood |
156 |
Journal of Educational Psychology |
52 |
Journal of Materials Chemistry |
110 |
PLoS ONE |
148 |
Academic Medicine |
52 |
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews |
108 |
Nature Medicine |
146 |
Journal of Vocational Behavior |
49 |
Chemistry of Materials |
107 |
Nature Reviews Cancer |
135 |
Foreign Affairs |
48 |
Bioresource Technology |
106 |
Neuron |
135 |
American Sociological Review |
47 |
Journal of Hazardous Materials |
106 |
British Medical Journal |
133 |
Progress in Human Geography |
47 |
Bioinformatics |
104 |
Cancer Research |
133 |
Teaching and Teacher Education |
47 |
IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence |
104 |
The Journal of Clinical Investigation |
133 |
Health & Place |
46 |
Journal of Power Sources |
100 |
The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews |
132 |
Land Use Policy |
46 |
IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics |
98 |
Gastroenterology |
132 |
Review of Educational Research |
45 |
IEEE Transactions on Information Theory |
93 |
Nature Immunology |
129 |
Annual Review of Sociology |
45 |
Humanities and Arts |
Life and Earth |
Physics and Math |
|||
Journal of Communication |
38 |
Nature |
355 |
Physical Review Letters |
191 |
Language Learning |
34 |
Science |
311 |
arXiv Cosmology and Extragalactic Astrophysics (astro-ph.CO) |
162 |
Public Opinion Quarterly |
32 |
Cell |
223 |
The Astrophysical Journal |
153 |
Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies |
32 |
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences |
217 |
arXiv High Energy Physics – Phenomenology (hep-ph) |
145 |
Synthese |
32 |
Nature Genetics |
188 |
arXiv Mesoscale and Nanoscale Physics (cond-mat.mes-hall) |
138 |
The Modern Language Journal |
31 |
Nucleic Acids Research |
164 |
arXiv Materials Science (cond-mat.mtrl-sci) |
136 |
Journal of Pragmatics |
31 |
PLoS ONE |
148 |
Physical Review D |
134 |
Lingua |
31 |
Neuron |
135 |
Journal of High Energy Physics |
130 |
System |
30 |
Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology |
131 |
arXiv Quantum Physics (quant-ph) |
128 |
Ethnic and Racial Studies |
30 |
Nature Reviews Genetics |
129 |
Physical Review B |
128 |
Applied Linguistics |
29 |
Nature Biotechnology |
129 |
Nature Physics |
124 |
Philosophical Studies |
28 |
Cell Stem Cell |
121 |
arXiv High Energy Physics – Theory (hep-th) |
124 |
Gender & Society |
27 |
Molecular Cell |
121 |
Nature Photonics |
122 |
Language |
26 |
Nature Cell Biology |
115 |
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society |
121 |
International Journal of Communication |
26 |
Environmental Science & Technology |
115 |
arXiv High Energy Physics – Experiment (hep-ex) |
118 |
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion |
26 |
Genes & Development |
114 |
Applied Physics Letters |
117 |
Language Teaching |
25 |
Journal of Biological Chemistry |
114 |
Astronomy & Astrophysics |
112 |
Political Communication |
25 |
Nature Methods |
113 |
arXiv Superconductivity (cond-mat.supr-con) |
109 |
Music Perception |
25 |
Genome Research |
109 |
Reviews of Modern Physics |
107 |
Journalism |
25 |
The Journal of Cell Biology |
108 |
arXiv High Energy Astrophysical Phenomena (astro-ph.HE) |
107 |
Pingback: Ninth Level Ireland » Blog Archive » Benchmarking Journals via Google Scholar
The journal rankings for Humanities and Arts are a joke. The “Journal of Communication” is the top journal? One suspects that the rankings are distorted by bias toward STEM subjects: the Journal of Communication is tops because it actually isn’t an Arts and Humanities Journal at all. Similar things could be said about some others. Furthermore, the emphasis is clearly on journals oriented toward the applied and the practical. Hence the emphasis on “language learning.”
Finally, what do you mean “us [sic] in AHSS disciplines”? You’re not in one. You’re in business. Here, read this: http://iasc-culture.org/THR/THR_article_2014_Summer_Brewer.php
Ernie
a) the rankings are the rankings from google scholar. Take your bitterness to them. And no, there is no ’emphasis’ as far as I am aware. Its a broad sweep
b) So you dont think business is a social science? That makes you and , errr… hang on.
Yeah, I got that it was from Google. In which case, I cannot explain the nonsensical idiocy of the rankings. Then again, what reason is there to think that Google–a business–would have any expertise at all in the domain of scholarship?
As for the other, related, question, if business is a social science, why isn’t it grouped into faculties with other social sciences at any university anywhere in the world? The answer is: it’s not a social science. Indeed, it’s not any kind of science or even a subject for scholarship. As that article points out, the idea of “business scholarship” is an oxymoron, both etymologically and in reality: “a scholé of the negation of scholé“. A busy-ness school is a contradiction in terms. As Brewer describes it:
Ernie : I warned you. Banned. How dare you suggest that I am not working in an academic discipline? . At least have the courage to “out ” yourself if you want to make cracks like that. My blog my rules – if you want to insult me do it my face.