SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.27 issue53Reassessing the feasibility of adopting dollarization in Latin America author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Journal

Article

Indicators

  • Have no cited articlesCited by SciELO

Related links

  • Have no similar articlesSimilars in SciELO

Share


Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Science

Print version ISSN 2077-1886

Abstract

OLAVARRIETA, Sergio. Using single impact metrics to assess research in business and economics: why institutions should use multi-criteria systems for assessing research. Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Science [online]. 2022, vol.27, n.53, pp.6-33.  Epub July 08, 2022. ISSN 2077-1886.  http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jefas-04-2021-0033.

Purpose:

Despite the general recommendation of using a combination of multiple criteria for research assessment and faculty promotion decisions, the raise of quantitative indicators is generating an emerging trend in Business Schools to use single journal impact factors (IFs) as key (unique) drivers for those relevant school decisions. This paper aims to investigate the effects of using single Web of Science (WoS)-based journal impact metrics when assessing research from two related disciplines: Business and Economics, and its potential impact for the strategic sustainability of a Business School.

Design/methodology/approach:

This study collected impact indicators data for Business and Economics journals from the Clarivate Web of Science database. We concentrated on the IF indicators, the Eigenfactor and the article influence score (AIS). This study examined the correlations between these indicators and then ranked disciplines and journals using these different impact metrics.

Findings:

Consistent with previous findings, this study finds positive correlations among these metrics. Then this study ranks the disciplines and journals using each impact metric, finding relevant and substantial differences, depending on the metric used. It is found that using AIS instead of the IF raises the relative ranking of Economics, while Business remains basically with the same rank.

Research limitations/implications:

This study contributes to the research assessment literature by adding substantial evidence that given the sensitivity of journal rankings to particular indicators, the selection of a single impact metric for assessing research and hiring/promotion and tenure decisions is risky and too simplistic. This research shows that biases may be larger when assessment involves researchers from related disciplines - like Business and Economics - but with different research foundations and traditions.

Practical implications:

Consistent with the literature, given the sensibility of journal rankings to particular indicators, the selection of a single impact metric for assessing research, assigning research funds and hiring/ promotion and tenure decisions is risky and simplistic. However, this research shows that risks and biases may be larger when assessment involves researchers from related disciplines - like Business and Economics - but with different research foundations and trajectories. The use of multiple criteria is advised for such purposes.

Originality/value:

This is an applied work using real data from WoS that addresses a practical case of comparing the use of different journal IFs to rank-related disciplines like Business and Economics, with important implications for faculty tenure and promotion committees and for research funds granting institutions and decision-makers.

Keywords : Impact factor; Article influence; Business journals; Research assessment; Faculty promotion and tenure..

        · text in English     · English ( pdf )