What Causes a Management Article to be Cited—Article, Author, or Journal?

    This article examines the influence of citation impact on scholarship. Citation analysis allows authors to determine how often their work has been cited by others. It has become a performance metric for scholars of the influence and relevance of their work. However, the authors contends there is very little research to understand citation rates. They conclude that the pressure from journals and universities for prestige is the key element driving citation rates. Increased information technology is expected to continue this trend into the future.

    REFERENCES

    • Baldi, 1998 Baldi S. 1998. Normative versus social constructivist processes in the allocation of citations: A network-analytic model. American Sociological Review, 63: 829–846. Google Scholar
    • Bedeian, 2002 Bedeian A. G. 2002. Caveat emptor: The Gourman Report. Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 39(1): 32–33. Google Scholar
    • Bedeian and Feild, 1980 Bedeian A. G., Feild H. S. 1980. Academic stratification in graduate management programs: Departmental prestige and faculty hiring patterns. Journal of Management, 6: 99–115. Google Scholar
    • Beyer, Chanove and Fox, 1995 Beyer J. M., Chanove R. G., Fox W. B. 1995. The review process and the fates of manuscripts submitted to AMJ. Academy of Management Journal, 38: 1219–1260.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Borokhovich, Bricker and Simkins, 1999 Borokhovich K. A., Bricker R. J., Simkins B. J. 1999. Financial Management's success as an academic journal. Financial Management, 28(X): 76–82. Google Scholar
    • Cable and Murray, 1999 Cable D. M., Murray B. 1999. Tournament vs. sponsored mobility determinants of job search success. Academy of Management Journal, 42: 439–449.AbstractGoogle Scholar
    • Campion, 1993 Campion M. A. 1993. Article review checklist: A criterion checklist for reviewing research articles in applied psychology. Personnel Psychology, 46: 705–719. Google Scholar
    • Christenson and Sigelman, 1985 Christenson J. A., Sigelman L. 1985. Accrediting knowledge: Journal stature and citation impact in social science. Social Science Quarterly, 66: 964–975. Google Scholar
    • Cohen and Cohen, 1983 Cohen J., Cohen P. 1983. Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar
    • Cole and Cole, 1972 Cole J. R., Cole S. 1972. The Ortega hypothesis. Science, 178: 368–375. Google Scholar
    • Cole, 1979 Cole S. 1979. Age and scientific performance. American Journal of Sociology, 84: 958–977. Google Scholar
    • Cole and Cole, 1967 Cole S., Cole J. R. 1967. Scientific output and recognition: A study in the operation of the reward system in science. American Sociological Review, 32: 377–390. Google Scholar
    • Cole and Cole, 1973 Cole S., Cole J. R. 1973. Social stratification in science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
    • Cook and Campbell, 1979 Cook T. D., Campbell D. T. 1979. Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues for field studies. Chicago: Rand-McNally. Google Scholar
    • Crane, 1965 Crane D. 1965. Scientists at major and minor universities: A study of productivity and recognition. American Sociological Review, 30: 699–714. Google Scholar
    • Cronin, 1984 Cronin B. 1984. The citation process. London: Taylor Graham. Google Scholar
    • Diamond, 1986 Diamond A. M. 1986. What is a citation worth? Journal of Human Resources, 21: 200–215. Google Scholar
    • Donohue and Fox, 2000 Donohue J. M., Fox J. B. 2000. A multi-method evaluation of journals in the decision and management sciences by US academics. Omega, 28: 17–36. Google Scholar
    • Dusansky and Vernon, 1998 Dusansky R., Vernon C. J. 1998. Rankings of U.S. economics departments. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12: 157–170. Google Scholar
    • Endler, Rushton and Roediger, 1978 Endler N. S., Rushton J. P., Roediger H. L. 1978. Productivity and scholarly impact. American Psychologist, 33: 1064–1082. Google Scholar
    • Fee, Hadlock and Pierce, 2005 Fee C. E., Hadlock C. J., Pierce J. R. 2005. Business school rankings and business school deans: A study of nonprofit governance. Financial Management, 34: 143–166. Google Scholar
    • Frank and Cook, 1995 Frank R. H., Cook P. 1995. The winner-take-all society. New York: Free Press. Google Scholar
    • Garfield, 1955 Garfield E. 1955. Citation indexes for science: A new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. Science, 122: 108–111. Google Scholar
    • Garfield, 1987 Garfield E. 1987. Mapping the world of science: Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool? In Jackson D. N.Rushton J. P. (Eds.), Scientific excellence: 18–39. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
    • Garfield, 2006 Garfield E. 2006. The history and meaning of the journal impact factor. Journal of the American Medical Association, 295: 90–93. Google Scholar
    • Gilbert, 1977 Gilbert G. N. 1977. Referencing as persuasion. Social Studies of Science, 7: 113–122. Google Scholar
    • Glass, 1955 Glass B. 1955. News and notes. Science, 21: 583–596. Google Scholar
    • Glick, McKelvey, Cooper, Huber and Zmud, 1997 Glick B., McKelvey B., Cooper M., Huber G., Zmud B. 1997. 1997 INFORMS committee review of Organization Science: Survey feedback from surveys of journal reputations (Unpublished report). INFORMS. Google Scholar
    • Glick, Miller and Cardinal, In press Glick W. H., Miller C. C., Cardinal L. B. In press. Making a life in the field of organization science. Journal of Organizational Behavior. Google Scholar
    • Gomez-Mejia and Balkin, 1992 Gomez-Mejia L. R., Balkin D. B. 1992. Determinants of faculty pay: An agency theory perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 35: 921–955.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Gottfredson, 1978 Gottfredson S. D. 1978. Evaluating psychological research reports: Dimensions, reliability, and correlates of quality judgments. American Psychologist, 33: 920–934. Google Scholar
    • Gourman, 1997 Gourman J. 1997. The Gourman report. Los Angeles: National Education Standards. Google Scholar
    • Helmreich, Spence, Beane, Lucker and Matthews, 1980 Helmreich R. L., Spence J. T., Beane W. E., Lucker G. W., Matthews K. A. 1980. Making it in academic psychology: Demographic and personality correlates of attainment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39: 896–908. Google Scholar
    • Huff, 1998 Huff A. S. 1998. Writing for scholarly publication. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
    • Johnson and Podsakoff, 1994 Johnson L. J., Podsakoff P. M. 1994. Journal influence in the field of management: An analysis using Salancik's index in a dependency network. Academy of Management Journal, 37: 1392–1407.AbstractGoogle Scholar
    • Judge, 2003 Judge T. A. 2003. Marginalizing the Journal of Applied Psychology. Industrial Psychologist, 40(1): 56–59. Google Scholar
    • Kerr, Tolliver and Petree, 1977 Kerr S., Tolliver J., Petree D. 1977. Manuscript characteristics which influence acceptance for management and social science journals. Academy of Management Journal, 20: 132–141.AbstractGoogle Scholar
    • LaBand, 1986 LaBand D. N. 1986. Article popularity. Economic Inquiry, 24: 173–180. Google Scholar
    • LaBand and Piette, 1994 LaBand D. N., Piette M. J. 1994. A citation analysis of the impact of blinded peer review. Journal of the American Medical Association, 272: 147–149. Google Scholar
    • Lundberg, 2003 Lundberg G. 2003. The “omnipotent” Science Citation Index impact factor. Medical Journal of Australia, 178: 253–254. Google Scholar
    • Martins, 2005 Martins L. L. 2005. A model of the effects of reputational rankings on organizational change. Organization Science, 16: 701–720. Google Scholar
    • Merton, 1957 Merton R. K. 1957. Priorities in scientific discovery: A chapter in the sociology of science. American Sociology Review, 22: 635–659. Google Scholar
    • Merton, 1963 Merton R. K. 1963. Resistance to the systematic study of multiple discoveries in science. Archives Europeennes de Sociologie, 4: 237–282. Google Scholar
    • Merton, 1968 Merton R. K. 1968. The Matthew effect in science. Science, 159: 56–63. Google Scholar
    • Mitra, 1970 Mitra A. C. 1970. The bibliographic reference: A review of its role. Annals of Library Science, 17: 117–123. Google Scholar
    • Monastersky, 2005 Monastersky R. 2005. The number that's devouring science. Chronicle of Higher Education, 52(8): A12. Google Scholar
    • Newman and Cooper, 1993 Newman J. M., Cooper E. 1993. Determinants of academic recognition: The case of the Journal of Applied Psychology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78: 518–526. Google Scholar
    • Nunnally, 1978 Nunnally J. 1978. Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar
    • Perkel, 2005 Perkel J. M. 2005. The future of citation analysis. Scientist, 19: 24–25. Google Scholar
    • Perreault and Leigh, 1989 Perreault W. D., Leigh L. E. 1989. Reliability of nominal data based on qualitative judgments. Journal of Marketing Research, 26: 135–148. Google Scholar
    • Peters and Ceci, 1982 Peters D. P., Ceci S. J. 1982. Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5: 187–255. Google Scholar
    • Pfeffer, 1993 Pfeffer J. 1993. Barriers to the advance of organizational science: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of Management Review, 18: 599–620.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Powell and Owen-Smith, 1998 Powell W. W., Owen-Smith J. 1998. Universities and the market for intellectual property in the life sciences. Journal of Policy Analysis & Management, 17: 253–277. Google Scholar
    • Rossiter, 1993 Rossiter M. W. 1993. The Matilda effect in science. Social Studies of Science, 23: 325–341. Google Scholar
    • Rousseau and McCarthy, 2007 Rousseau D. M., McCarthy S. 2007. Educating managers from an evidence-based perspective. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 6: 84–101.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Seglen, 1997 Seglen P. O. 1997. Why the impact factor should not be used for evaluating research. British Medical Journal, 314: 498–502. Google Scholar
    • Shadish, Tolliver, Gray and Sengupta, 1995 Shadish W. R., Tolliver D., Gray M., Sengupta S. K. 1995. Author judgments about works they cite. Social Studies of Science, 25: 477–498. Google Scholar
    • Slaughter and Leslie, 1997 Slaughter S., Leslie L. 1997. Academic capitalism: Politics, policies, and the entrepreneurial university. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Google Scholar
    • Starbuck, 2005 Starbuck W. H. 2005. How much better are the most-prestigious journals? The statistics of academic publication. Organization Science, 16: 180–200. Google Scholar
    • Tahai and Meyer, 1999 Tahai A., Meyer M. J. 1999. A revealed preference study of management journals' direct influences. Strategic Management Journal, 20: 279–296. Google Scholar
    • Turner and Rojouan, 1991 Turner W. A., Rojouan F. 1991. Evaluating input/output relationships in a regional research network using co-word analysis. Scientometrics, 22: 139–154. Google Scholar
    • Van Maanen, 1995 Van Maanen J. 1995. Style as theory. Organization Science, 6: 133–143. Google Scholar
    • Zell, 2005 Zell D. 2005. Pressure for relevancy at top-tier business schools. Journal of Management Inquiry, 14: 271–274. Google Scholar