Critically evaluating an applications vs theory framework for research quality

Michael John Jones

Omega, 1999, vol. 27, issue 3, 397-401

Abstract: Ormerod [Ormerod RJ. An observation on publication habits based on the analysis of MS/OR journals. Omega Int J Mgmt Sci 1997;25:599-603.] contributes to an ongoing debate by pointing out that not only do US authors frequently publish in UK journals, but also that journal articles can be analysed on the basis of being 'untested theory' or 'true applications'. Such a taxonomy might, Ormerod suggests, be an alternative method of evaluating 'research quality' to the established methods of peer review or citation analysis. This response critically evaluates this suggestion in terms of validity, reliability, practicability and exhaustiveness. Ormerod's case is found not proven.

Keywords: Citation; indices; Peer; review; True; applications; Untested; theory (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 1999
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305-0483(98)00066-8
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:jomega:v:27:y:1999:i:3:p:397-401

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
https://shop.elsevie ... _01_ooc_1&version=01

Access Statistics for this article

Omega is currently edited by B. Lev

More articles in Omega from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().