我国会计类核心期刊的现状分析与启示——兼论《上海立信会计学院学报》的改进

文章分析了国内14种会计类核心期刊的现状,在此基础上,探索了《上海立信会计学院学报》改进与发展之路,以期为国内会计类学术刊物与财经类高校学报的规范与发展提供有益的启示。     

Ranking Journals Using Social Science Research Network Downloads

I use a new approach to rank journals, namely the number and percent frequency of articles a journal publishes that are heavily downloaded from the Social Science Research Network (SSRN). I rank 18 accounting and finance journals, and I identify five journals not considered by the two most recent major published ranking studies of publications by accounting faculty, namely (in rank order): Journal of Financial Economics, Review of Accounting Studies, Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Journal of Corporate Finance, and Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting. I show that financial accounting faculties are more likely to post their working papers to SSRN, and papers posted by financial faculties generate more downloads. I mitigate this bias in favor of the financial area by providing separate rankings based on authors in the financial versus non-financial areas.     

Key institutions in business and management education research

The authors investigate institutional productivity in business and management education (BME) research based on the analysis of 4,464 articles published by 7,210 authors across 17 BME journals over a 10-year period, involving approximately 1,900 schools worldwide. Departing from traditional disciplinary silos, they examine the BME research field as a whole by including all traditional business disciplinary areas and producing two top 100 rankings, one based on raw number of author publications and the other based on weighted scores reflecting journal quality and coauthorship.     

Drivers of research impact: evidence from the top three finance journals

We study the characteristics of all published papers in the top three finance journals (JF, JFE and RFS), and how these paper characteristics affect the number of citations in Google Scholar and the Web of Science database. First, we find the characteristics in the universalist perspective remain constant while the characteristics in the constructivist and presentation perspectives increase over time. Second, some characteristics are significantly different between the high-impact and the low-impact papers. Third, paper quality, research method, journal placement and paper age are the most important drivers. Last, different drivers play different roles in different journals.     

GRADING JOURNALS IN ECONOMICS: THE ABCS OF THE ABDC

Many institutions and governments grade academic journals for the evaluation of research. In this paper, we implement a multi-bibliometric methodology for the evaluation of such a list of journal grades. We examine the grades assigned by the Australian Business Deans Council (ABDC) for over 750 journals in the fields of economics and statistics. Firstly, we generate up to 48 bibliometric-based grades for each journal based on the grade distribution implied by the ABDC. Secondly, we categorize the bibliometrics employing a cluster analysis of an interrater agreement statistic. Thirdly, we present a visualization of the consistency of the grading by journal. Finally, we list those journals where the majority of the matched bibliometrics indicate a higher or lower grade than their ABDC grade.     

Academic labour,journal ranking lists and the politics of knowledge production in marketing

In this paper, we engage with the rising importance of journal ranking lists. We explore the pressure these place on marketing academics and the politics of knowledge production, stressing academic game-playing, careerism, and paradigmatic homogeneity. We appreciate that scholars are disciplined by these lists, their line managers, and reaffirm list power through their own patterns of self-management. Nonetheless, marketing academics should avoid making the naïve assumption that the appearance of a paper in a highly rated journal necessarily serves as a proxy for ‘quality’. Publication in a particular outlet does not transform the ultimate contribution being made in any substantive fashion. We provide an extensive critique of the function and impact of journal lists. However, it is also recognised that these are very important for members of the marketing community. As such, we explain our reasons for contesting the recent regrading of the Journal of Marketing Management (JMM) by a prominent journal list and underline the changes that have been made to the Journal since the beginning of the current editorial term. Finally, the support of prominent scholars among our thought community for the policies being implemented is highlighted and we underscore the rigour of contributions to the Journal, the review process, the rising citations, downloads and truly global readership of the JMM.     

冷清与坚持：改革开放30年来行政诉讼检察监督的研究回溯——以CNKI期刊数据库论文为分析素材

CNKI期刊数据库收录的相关文献表明,30多年（1979-2010）来,虽然只有少数理论界人士关注了行政诉讼检察监督的研究,但是已经涉及了行政诉讼检察监督的正当性、监督方式、监督范围、监督程序等多个方面。特别是在监督方式方面,涉及到了抗诉、参与诉讼、提起公诉、支持诉讼的探讨;在监督范围方面,有全面监督、有限监督、诉讼监督、审判监督的阐释。这些研究对于行政诉讼检察监督制度的完善具有重要启示。     

中国会计学博士点培养方案调查与评价

中国会计学博士教育日益面临来自就业市场和国际竞争的压力。文章通过考察国内会计学博士培养方案的状况,运用期刊论文发表数量对会计学博士点进行排名,旨在探索能够培养出更具研究能力的博士生培养方案。研究结果发现,培养出最多具有研究能力博士生的前三名博士点分别来自上海财经大学、中国人民大学和北京大学,从培养方案来看,排名靠前的博士点在公共课部分几乎都开设了计量经济学和微观经济学。结论认为,学习美国的研究范式和哲学思想可能并不完全适合中国,在培养方案的设计上还要更多考虑中国本土的问题。     

浅谈科技期刊编辑应具备的素质

科技期刊编辑是对信息过滤和加工的人,对信息发布形成垄断和集权,是科技期刊的把关人。他对科技期刊的质量起着至关重要的作用。本文主要讨论科技期刊编辑应该具有的一些基本素质。     

学术期刊的异化问题及其应对策略

学术期刊广为诟病的原因在于其异化的实质,主要表现为功能的异化和评价标准的异化。目前学术期刊已经异化成为学术主体和把关人追逐名利的工具,办刊人只求形式创新而忽略内容实质,各办刊单位简单地把量化指标作为学术期刊评价的指挥棒,学术期刊及其把关人的工作评价和话语权受制于期刊的社会地位,还常常以门第观念先入为主地评价学术成果。这些问题已经严重地影响了学术自由的规律,成为学术不端和学术腐败的主要现象之一。要想改变这种现状,必须建立健全学术评价体系,构建学术信誉机制;加快学术诚信立法进程,提高学术腐败成本;强化学术期刊的功能,回归其学术本位;加强编辑队伍建设,建立从业人员职业规范。