Tools for evaluating research output: Are citation-base rankings of economics journals stable?

Matthias Sutter and Martin Kocher

Munich Reprints in Economics from University of Munich, Department of Economics

Abstract: Journal rankings are important for evaluating research output, for academic promotions, and for allocating funds. Examining the assignment of economics journals to different quartiles of citation-based rankings, the authors found that about 60% of journals remain in the same quartile and about 95% of journals remain in the same or move in a neighborhood quartile within 5- to 10-year intervals. Top journal rankings exhibit even more inertia, which is a desirable property for decisions on promotion, tenure, or institutional evaluation. A reexamination of journal assignment to different quality categories every 5 or 10 years, therefore, suffices for practical evaluation purposes.

Date: 2001
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (21)

Published in Evaluation Review 5 25(2001): pp. 555-566

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

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:lmu:muenar:18222

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Munich Reprints in Economics from University of Munich, Department of Economics Ludwigstr. 28, 80539 Munich, Germany. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Tamilla Benkelberg ().