Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/103704
Authors: 
Eisend, Martin
Year of Publication: 
2011
Citation: 
[Journal:] BuR - Business Research [ISSN:] 1866-8658 [Volume:] 4 [Year:] 2011 [Issue:] 2 [Pages:] 241-274
Abstract: 
This study examines the question of whether the journal ranking VHB-JOURQUAL 2 can be considered as a good measure for the construct “scientific quality”. Various rankings in business research provide the database for the analysis. The correlations between theses rankings are used to assess the validity of VHB-JOURQUAL 2 along various validity criteria. The correlations with rankings that measure the same construct based on different methods show that VHB-JOURQUAL 2 has acceptable, but moderate convergent validity. The validity varies considerably across disciplines, showing that the heterogeneity of business administration is not sufficiently represented by this overall ranking. The variability is related to the variation in members per discipline represented by the German Association for Business Research. Furthermore, the measure shows a weak correlation with acceptance rates as an indicator of nomological validity in some disciplines.
Subjects: 
VHB-JOURQUAL 2
journal standing
journal ranking
business research journals
evaluation of scholars
journal ranking methods
validity
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Document Type: 
Article

Files in This Item:
File
Size
2.13 MB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.