Fig 4 - uploaded by Shibo Li
Content may be subject to copyright.
Average new cites by year  

Average new cites by year  

Source publication
Article
Full-text available
Researchers from diverse disciplines have exam-ined the many factors that contribute to the influence of published research papers. Such influence dynamics are in essence a marketing of science issue. In this paper, we propose that in addition to known established, overt drivers of influ-ence such as journal, article, author, and Matthew effects, a...

Similar publications

Conference Paper
Full-text available
The increase in intermittent renewable energy sources, such as solar photovoltaics (PV), can lead to mismatches between energy demand and supply, which must be balanced by the grid or expensive batteries. This could be reflected in dynamic electricity prices, which already partly exist as peak tariffs. In grids with high PV penetration, generation...
Article
Full-text available
At this time, Pará is one of the Brazilian Amazonian State where the rate of deforestation is very high. The deforestation front is developing along the transamazonian road from perpendicular secondary runways, phenomenon identified for more than 20 years under the term of "fish-bone deforestation front". The study site is a colonization area locat...
Technical Report
Full-text available
This study on the commercial sexual exploitation of children in Lao PDR was commissioned through a joint collaboration between the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare, UNICEF Lao PDR, UNIAP, Save the Children and World Vision in a effort to gain a better understanding to inform and guide national action on this issue. While CSEC has been identifi...
Article
Full-text available
In this paper we considered several frameworks for data mining. These frameworks are based on different approaches, including inductive databases approach, the reductionist statistical approaches, data compression approach, constructive induction approach and some others. We considered advantages and limitations of these frameworks. We presented th...

Citations

... ML and IJRM, it must be mentioned, emerged for a segment of Marketing Science (MS) and Journal of Marketing Research (JMR) authors/readers, respectively (Lehmann, 2005;Touzani & Moussa, 2010). ML and IJRM are positivists, quantitative, and managerial in ethos (Fuat Firat, 2010;Li et al., 2015;Moussa, 2019;Tadajewski, 2016a). This leads us to the following conclusion: the positivist, quantitative, and managerial agenda is overrepresented in the membership of the scientific committees/panels behind these journal quality lists. ...
Article
Journal quality lists are becoming omnipresent and omnipotent. Using the Foucauldian concept of the panopticon, this study critically assesses the proclaimed impartiality and objectivity of three of these lists. It does so by: (a) identifying the seven marketing scholars that have contributed to the construction of these three lists; and (b) implementing an analysis that is rarely used in marketing; namely, a Curriculum Vitae (CV) analysis. The names of the identified seven scholars are kept concealed as the case is not to castigate/question a specific academic, but rather to rouse the debate on the usefulness(less) of these lists. The CV analysis ascertains that the three scrutinised lists are way less impartial and objective than they may seem. This study’s results are in stark contrast with any argument advocating the impartiality and objectivity of these journal quality lists. Seen from a Foucauldian standpoint, these lists appear as panoptic power/knowledge tools.
... Impact measures pertaining to public uptake, such as Alternative metrics (Altmetrics), often take the sum of article-related press releases, case studies, public policy documents, and patents, as well as public, social, and alternative media (Altmetric 2017;Bornmann, Haunschild, and Adams 2019;Costas, Zahedi, and Wouters 2015;Gumpenberger, Glänzel, and Gorraiz 2016;Mukherjee, Subotić, and Chaubey 2018;Ozanne et al. 2017;Thelwall et al. 2013). Prior research into what influences research articles' academic impact shows that university reputation, affiliation, and journal ranking matter (Li, Sivadas, and Johnson 2015;Stremersch, Verniers, and Verhoef 2007). The impact of service research articles also is fundamentally driven by their content and style. ...
... We controlled for several external features of the articles that previous research has linked to their impact: the number of authors, whether the first author has a U.S. affiliation (i.e., employed by a U.S. university or institution ¼ 1 or not ¼ 0), whether (¼ 1) or not (¼ 0), the article was a JSR Best Paper award winner, and the age of the article as the number of years since its publication (e.g., Li, Sivadas, and Johnson 2015;Stremersch and Verhoef 2005). Third, in line with Humphreys (2010) and Trusov, Bucklin, and Pauwels (2009), we include a press release measure of the number of press releases containing the full title and journal information within a year of the article's publication date, obtained from the Dow Jones Factiva database (https://global-factiva-com). ...
Article
Full-text available
For service researchers, contributing to academic advancement through academic publications is a raison d’être. Moreover, demand is increasing for service researchers to make a difference beyond academia. Thus, service researchers face the formidable challenge of writing in a manner that resonates with not just service academics but also practitioners, policy makers, and other stakeholders. In this article, the authors examine how service research articles’ lexical variations might influence their academic citations and public media coverage. Drawing on the complete corpus of Journal of Service Research ( JSR) articles published between 1998 and 2020, they use text analytics and thereby determine that variations in language intensity, immediacy, and diversity relate to article impact. The appropriate use of these lexical variants and other stylistic conventions depends on the audience (academic or the public), the subsection of this article in which they appear (e.g., introduction, implications), and article innovativeness. This article concludes with an actionable “how-to” guide for ways to increase article impacts in relation to different JSR audiences.
... it is widely believed that the number of citations received by a journal or an article measures (or reflects) its influence, impact, and/or intrinsic quality (Baumgartner and Pieters 2003;Eisend and Lehmann 2016;Li et al. 2015;Stremersch et al. 2007). ...
... In marketing, there are to date three major studies that investigated the drivers/factors/ causes of article citations (i.e., Li et al. 2015;Stremersch et al. 2007Stremersch et al. , 2015. One of these studies indicates that article length has a significant positive effect on article citations (see Stremersch et al. 2007, p.180). ...
Article
To date, limited studies have examined the citations of articles published in predatory journals, and none appears to have been done in marketing. Using Google Scholar (GS) as a citation source, this study aims to examine the extent of citations of (articles published in) 10 predatory marketing journals. Citation analyses indicate that the most cited predatory marketing journal gathered 6,296 citations since it was first published in 2008. Four of the 10 predatory journals gathered over 732 citations each since they were launched (i.e., highly cited). Three other journals were cited between 147 and 732 times (i.e., moderately cited). The three remaining journals received below 147 citations each (i.e., trivially cited). Findings show that the 1,246 articles published in these 10 predatory journals, and which are visible to GS, received 10,935 citations with 8.776 citations per paper. About 11.624% of these 1,246 articles were cited 13 times or more. The most cited article received 217 citations, of which 21 are from journals indexed in Clarivate Analytics’ Social Sciences Citation Index. Based on these findings, this study concludes that the conventional marketing literature has been already contaminated by predatory marketing journals.
... On the other hand, perceived research weighting is less likely to be different between genders. Specifically, unlike teaching and service, research output is not a within-institution metric and is "credited" outside of a university and across academic circles and networks through impact factors (e.g., Li, Sivadas, & Johnson, 2015;Theuβl, Reutterer, & Hornik, 2014). In fact, research performance is an expectation for most tenure track and tenured professors throughout business schools. ...
... We did not hypothesize differences in PPW-R across genders because universities are more likely to clearly enunciate research expectations within and across disciplines. Even though these expectations may vary with different business disciplines and subdisciplines, impact factors, journal rankings, and citation counts tend to be an extremely salient and highly researched metric for research performance (e.g., Li et al., 2015;Theuβl et al., 2014). On the other hand, these types of third-party metrics are not readily available for service and teaching performance. ...
Article
In American business schools, the higher the position, the lower the female representation, especially when including additional intersections of identity such as race, sexual orientation, and ethnicity. Our article aims to supplement existing research regarding gender bias and underrepresentation in academia, particularly in business schools. Such research can uncover faculty gender issues, work toward mitigating the existing biases related to diversity and inclusion, and bring a needed voice and discussion for the purpose of moving toward solutions. To build our hypotheses, we provide a literature review regarding academic satisfaction, perceived performance weight–teaching and perceived performance weight–service differences between genders, and gender issues with the academic pipeline to full professor. Next, we utilize data collected from a sample of n = 696 academics from American business schools and find that women faculty have significantly lower academic satisfaction throughout all ranks and institutions. Our results further indicate that there are differences in perceived performance weight–teaching and perceived performance weight–service between female and male academics at the ranks of assistant and full professors at various types of institutions. Last, we offer conclusions and implications, limitations, and future research suggestions that include studies regarding intersectional faculty, academic mobbing and bullying, incivility, and academic satisfaction.
... To better understand the factors that contribute to such scholarship, this longitudinal study examines the effects of coauthorship, database indexing, and article length on citation counts, a widely used measure of scholarly impact (Li, Sivadas, & Johnson, 2015). To be clear, it is important to note that other methods exist for determining the impact of an academic's work (Howard & Garland, 2015). ...
... Critics, however, have argued that the impact of a journal represents a problematic method for assessing the impact of the individual articles featured in a journal (Li et al., 2015). For instance, journal impact factors-perhaps the most widely used measure of journal impact-are based upon the mean number of citations the av-erage article receives over a given time period. ...
... The shift toward a more direct measurement of scholars' work is not unique to social work (Li et al., 2015). The evaluation of individual outcomes is largely a university-driven phenomenon (Holosko & Barner, 2016). ...
Article
Objective Disseminating high-impact scholarship is a critical task for many social work academics. Although the factors that contribute to this process have been investigated in other disciplines, there is a paucity of equivalent research in social work. This longitudinal study addresses this gap in the literature by examining the effects of coauthorship, database indexing, and article length on subsequent citation counts, a widely used measure of scholarly impact. Based upon the extant research, we hypothesized that all three factors would be associated with a greater number of citations 5 years after publication. Method The sample consisted of 3,066 articles, published inclusively from 2005 to 2009 in 18 disciplinary social work journals. Multilevel negative binomial regression was used to model the effects of each factor on 5-year citation counts. Results The findings generally supported the hypotheses. Articles were more likely to be cited in subsequent scholarship if they were (a) written by 3 or more authors, (b) retrievable from more databases, and (c) longer. Conclusions The results raise the possibility that authors interested in high-impact scholarship might benefit from working in authorship teams to create longer papers containing more original ideas, and then submitting the resulting manuscripts to journals that are indexed in multiple electronic databases.
... Particular papers and researchers who do well on research quality measures (i.e. they have published many papers with a high percentage of them in A* and A rated journals) may not do as well in terms of citations. This can occur because it takes time for a contribution to be appreciated and because the citability of a paper depends in part on the number of active researchers working in the subject area and their citation behaviour (Li et al., 2015). As a result, research in specialised topic areas may have little chance of getting a high number of cites, such as macro marketing, historical studies, esoteric research methods. ...
Article
Full-text available
We report the results of an analysis of the research impact of marketing academics using citation metrics for 2263 academics in the top 500 research universities in the Academic Ranking of World Universities based in Australia and New Zealand, Canada, the United Kingdom and the USA. The metrics are computed for publications from 2001 to 2013, which were collected in 2014 and 2015. We also report the same metrics for all universities in Australia and New Zealand that employ more than 4 marketing academics. The results provide an objective measure of research impact and provide benchmarks that can be used by governments, universities and individual academics to compare research impact. In an appendix we rank the top 100 university marketing departments in the top 500.
... Further, Li et al.'s (2014) recent study reveals that citations seem to attract more citations. ...
... The term Matthew effect, which refers to the Gospel of Matthew, the first book of the New Testament, was introduced by the sociologist Robert Merton in 1968, who showed that already well-known scientists will often get more credit for their work than their not-sofamous colleagues. Li et al. (2014) also point to the importance of attracting citations quickly to papers: "if a paper is not cited early, while it may not go uncited in the future, it may result in low relational in scholar's mind, and hence its long-term influence is in great doubt". ...
... First of all, I strongly agree with Li et al. (2014) that journal impact factors or journal rankings should not be used to measure the impact of individual articles, as articles without any impact may be published in highly ranked journals or journals with high impact factor, whereas articles with high impact could be published in lower ranked journals or journals with low impact factors. ...
Article
Full-text available
Increasingly, academics have to demonstrate that their research has academic impact. Universities normally use journal rankings and journal impact factors to assess the research impact of individual academics. More recently, citation counts for individual articles and the h-index have also been used to measure the academic impact of academics. There are, however, several serious problems with relying on journal rankings, journal impact factors and citation counts. For example, articles without any impact may be published in highly ranked journals or journals with high impact factor, whereas articles with high impact could be published in lower ranked journals or journals with low impact factor. Citation counts can also be easily gamed and manipulated and the h-index disadvantages early career academics. This paper discusses these and several other problems and suggests alternatives such as post-publication peer review and open-access journals.
Article
Full-text available
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to assess the viability of the scholarly search engine Microsoft Academic (MA) as a citation source for evaluating/ranking marketing journals. Design/methodology/approach This study performs a comparison between MA and Google Scholar (GS) in terms of journal coverage, h -index values and journal rankings. Findings Findings indicate that: MA (vs GS) covers 96.80 percent (vs 97.87 percent) of the assessed 94 marketing-focused journals; the MA-based h -index exhibits values that are 35.45 percent lower than the GS-based h -index; and that the MA-based ranking and the GS-based ranking are highly consistent. Based on these findings, MA seems to constitute a rather viable citation source for assessing a marketing journal’s impact. Research limitations/implications This study focuses on one discipline, that is, marketing. Originality/value This study identifies some issues that would need to be fixed by the MA’s development team. It recommends some further enhancements with respect to journal title entry, publication year allocation and field classification. It also provides two up-to-date rankings for more than 90 marketing-focused journals based on actual cites (October 2018) of articles published between 2013 and 2017.
Article
Full-text available
Regarding evaluation of individual researchers, the bibliometric indicators approach has been increasingly discussed recently, but there are some problems involved with it: construct definition, measurement errors, level of scale, dimensionality, normalization. Based on a psychometric model, the Rasch model, we developed a measuring scale for the theoretical construct 'researcher's performance capacity,' defined as the competency of a researcher to write influential papers. The aim was a scale that is one-dimensional and continuous, is applicable to bibliometric count variables, and takes measurement errors into account. In this paper we present the psychometric model (Bayesian Poisson Rasch model, BPR) and its assumptions and examine the behavior of the model under various sampling conditions. For a sample of N = 254 researchers in a quantitative methodology section of an undisclosed German academic society for social sciences, using the BPR model we developed a scale that we named 'Bibliometric Quotient' (BQ, M = 100, SD = 15) (following the term 'intelligence quotient'). The scale fulfills most of the test-theoretical requirements (e.g., high reliability αt=.96, no differential item functioning except for academic age and German states) and in addition allows researchers to be ranked. Women's BQ scores were 8.3 points lower on the scale than men's BQ scores.
Article
The theme of this article is adopted from the work of leadership experts Heifetz and Linsky, who described the need for organizational leaders to balance their time on the “dance floor” (managing tasks) with time viewing from the “balcony” (understanding the bigger picture). The physical education teacher education doctoral program faculty on many campuses would be well advised to periodically invest time distancing themselves from the daily rigors of research, teaching, and service to better understand the challenges and opportunities confronting their programs. Furthermore, faculty must be willing to critique their program and its strategic direction, eliminate ineffective practices that consume limited resources, and retain what is most important. The purpose of this article is to provide collective observations “from the balcony” for faculty working in physical education teacher education doctoral programs as a catalyst for discussion.