Quarterly Journal of Speech Impact Factor & Information

Publisher: Speech Communication Association; National Association of Teachers of Speech (U.S.); Speech Association of America, Taylor & Francis (Routledge)

Journal description

Quarterly Journal of Speech, published in February, May, August and November, includes articles, research reports, and book reviews of interest to persons across a broad spectrum of the communication arts. QJS tends to be humanistic in its orientation. QJS presents research that is original, significant, and designed to further understanding of the processes of human communication, particularly in its rhetorical and cultural dimensions. Essays in the journal generally consider the theory and criticism of situated discourse in its various forms and venues, including the oral and written, public and private, direct and mediated, historical and contemporary. Although research in the journal is generally humanistic, the journal's mission and focus are not limited to any particular methodology or set of methodologies. Issues, texts, and research questions significant to improved understanding of discourse practices are featured.

Current impact factor: 0.36

Impact Factor Rankings

2015 Impact Factor Available summer 2015
2009 Impact Factor 0.395

Additional details

5-year impact 0.52
Cited half-life 0.00
Immediacy index 0.00
Eigenfactor 0.00
Article influence 0.18
Website Quarterly Journal of Speech website
Other titles The Quarterly journal of speech
ISSN 0033-5630
OCLC 1763239
Material type Periodical, Internet resource
Document type Journal / Magazine / Newspaper, Internet Resource

Publisher details

Taylor & Francis (Routledge)

  • Pre-print
    • Author can archive a pre-print version
  • Post-print
    • Author can archive a post-print version
  • Conditions
    • Some individual journals may have policies prohibiting pre-print archiving
    • On author's personal website or departmental website immediately
    • On institutional repository or subject-based repository after a 18 months embargo
    • Publisher's version/PDF cannot be used
    • On a non-profit server
    • Published source must be acknowledged
    • Must link to publisher version
    • Set statements to accompany deposits (see policy)
    • The publisher will deposit in on behalf of authors to a designated institutional repository including PubMed Central, where a deposit agreement exists with the repository
    • SSH: Social Science and Humanities
    • Publisher last contacted on 25/03/2014
    • This policy is an exception to the default policies of 'Taylor & Francis (Routledge)'
  • Classification
    ​ green

Publications in this journal

  • Quarterly Journal of Speech 03/2015; 101(2):426-438. DOI:10.1080/00335630.2015.1020001
  • Quarterly Journal of Speech 03/2015; 101(2):448-452. DOI:10.1080/00335630.2015.1020005
  • Quarterly Journal of Speech 03/2015; 101(2):443-448. DOI:10.1080/00335630.2015.1020004
  • Quarterly Journal of Speech 03/2015; 101(2):439-443. DOI:10.1080/00335630.2015.1020002
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This response to Kathleen Hall Jamieson's “The Discipline's Debate Contributions” brings forth, via a sampling of existing literature, those research trajectories about political debates ignored or minimized by Professor Jamieson as those trajectories hold true to the values and traditions of the Communication discipline and as they operate alongside the literature she surveys about debate effects. In particular, we suggest that political debates provide fascinating material for a range of rhetorical analyses that examine (1) the production and creation of political debates as rhetorical/political artifacts; (2) the language and arguments put forth in these events; and (3) the circulation of political debates as rhetorical texts in and through U.S. political culture. In so doing, we resist the hegemony of Professor Jamieson's “effects” approach to political debates both as that hegemony demarcates research about political debates and as it describes the limits and scope of Communication research generally.
    Quarterly Journal of Speech 02/2015; 101(1):113-126. DOI:10.1080/00335630.2015.994902
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Using the first five years of the Quarterly Journal of Speech as a record of Communication Studies' founding, I contend that the discipline began with a tension between contrasting sets of affect and reasoning. In the initial volumes of QJS, one reads many recommendations designed to establish the discipline's academic sovereignty and self-determination, but, at the same time, other essays suggest a commitment to cross-disciplinary inquiry and citizenship. I interpret this tension through contemporary theories of nationalism and cosmopolitanism. These concepts highlight the implications of competing visions for the discipline's future, but they also reveal how cosmopolitan and nationalist processes complemented one another in the early years of “Speech.” I argue, finally, that this tension provides opportunities for Communication Studies in the twenty-first century.
    Quarterly Journal of Speech 02/2015; 101(1):244-257. DOI:10.1080/00335630.2015.995437
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Rhetoric and communication inquiry characterize the broader discipline of communication studies. The discipline has developed by retaining interest in questions of interaction and exchange, language and institutions, as well as publics and social change. The futures of such work include critical investigations into communication societies that are culturally diverse, technologically wired, local-cosmopolitan networks. I support Andrew King's position that economics should play an increasingly important role in our discipline, but I urge that inquiry be extended beyond ideological critique with its melioristic ends. Communication society should be examined in its varied and specific sites of inquiry in order to create an emergent global discipline.
    Quarterly Journal of Speech 02/2015; 101(1):145-150. DOI:10.1080/00335630.2015.999982
  • Quarterly Journal of Speech 02/2015; 101(1):306-311. DOI:10.1080/00335630.2015.994889
  • Quarterly Journal of Speech 02/2015; 101(1):314-317. DOI:10.1080/00335630.2015.994891
  • Article: Pathologia
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although pathology has been read most commonly as the broken connections between people, this essay reconsiders a narrative of pathology that helps to underscore sensation's primacy within our public rhetorical lives.
    Quarterly Journal of Speech 02/2015; 101(1):34-45. DOI:10.1080/00335630.2015.995921
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Inspired by this journal's centennial occasion and John Murphy's call to rhetorical history, I queer his reading of Barack Obama's “turn to the past.” Turning to my own critical past, I revive incipient ideas of contextual twilight, critical liminality, and critical self-portraiture to query the operative rhetorical traditions neither Murphy nor Obama voice, to draw distinctions between making and accounting for LGBTQ history, and to imagine the history Obama might tell were the critic to ask. This historical-critical labor strives to expand the reach and grasp of queering rhetorical studies for the next century of the Quarterly Journal of Speech.
    Quarterly Journal of Speech 02/2015; 101(1):225-243. DOI:10.1080/00335630.2015.995926
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This response will contemplate how the fluid mechanics managing the dialectic between nationalism and cosmopolitanism were imbricated with the affective registers of racialized forms of conceptualizing and categorizing the discipline. I want to suggest that the manner in which claims of belonging to and eviction from national dwelling places can be historically coordinated with this nation's emergent racial imaginaries. I will argue that this history has forged important critical capacities that we should cultivate more actively to meet current and future challenges from within and without the academy. Also, I will embark upon a brief trial of critical cosmopolitanism in terms of how it might shape and guide an assessment of a difficult challenge being mounted by Afro-Pessimism to some essential presumptions of Communication Studies in general and Rhetorical Studies in particular.
    Quarterly Journal of Speech 02/2015; 101(1):271-279. DOI:10.1080/00335630.2015.995433
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Martin Medhurst mourns the disappearance from the pages of QJS of four areas of scholarship. In response, I argue: (1) that publication in some of these areas is more robust than ever, simply having moved to other venues; (2) that some of these areas never demonstrated the disciplinary value Medhurst attributes to them; (3) that the disappearance of some of these areas is a necessary product of disciplinary evolution; (4) and that QJS, 100 years after its first issue, is still serving, as it has always served, as a spawning ground for the best new scholarship in our discipline.
    Quarterly Journal of Speech 02/2015; 101(1):197-208. DOI:10.1080/00335630.2015.999987
  • Quarterly Journal of Speech 02/2015; 101(1):321-324. DOI:10.1080/00335630.2015.994894
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In this paper, the author reconsiders the historical narrative of Rhetorical Studies as a citizenship narrative and thus argues that much rhetorical theory works to uphold the value and ideal of citizenship, while often ignoring or reframing appeals that challenge the very bases of citizenship and the nation-state. This account of Rhetoric's intellectual history reveals the very parameters for what deserves attention in disciplinary history. The author suggests that this account also reveals the necessity to break from that history, not in order that Rhetoric become more inclusive but so that Rhetoric may be something entirely different, something constituted through non-normative, non-citizen, non-Western perspectives and ways of knowing and being.
    Quarterly Journal of Speech 02/2015; 101(1):162-172. DOI:10.1080/00335630.2015.994908
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This short essay surveys the breadth of scholarship published in the Quarterly Journal of Speech since its beginnings in 1915. I argue that many of the areas once regularly published in QJS have slowly—and rightly—migrated to other journals or other fields entirely. However, there are four areas that have only recently disappeared from the pages of QJS, and these areas—translations of key texts, studies in textual authenticity, rhetorical history, and studies of non-academic rhetorical practitioners—need to be recovered. By recuperating these four areas, QJS will better represent the breadth of rhetorical scholarship and incorporate important voices into the ongoing conversation about the nature and practice of rhetoric.
    Quarterly Journal of Speech 02/2015; 101(1):186-196. DOI:10.1080/00335630.2015.999995
  • Quarterly Journal of Speech 02/2015; 101(1):292-296. DOI:10.1080/00335630.2015.994885
  • Quarterly Journal of Speech 02/2015; 101(1):311-314. DOI:10.1080/00335630.2015.994890
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: After arguing that our disciplinary origins and aptitudes equip us to understand the practice and potential of political debate, this essay will synthesize briefly some of the contributions our scholarship has made to understanding televised presidential debates, telegraph some major findings about three topics—learning from debates, factors that mediate audience response, and the ways in which candidate debate communication forecasts the presidency of the eventual winner—and will then note questions about each of these three areas that invite additional inquiry.
    Quarterly Journal of Speech 02/2015; 101(1):85-97. DOI:10.1080/00335630.2015.994905