I’m trying to collate papers, blogs and data about the use of the ABS list and also its relationship to REF outcomes. I am concerned that the ABS list is being used to police knowledge production within business and management schools, and it is being used inappropriately with students (taught and research).
Will update as I go. Some of these are ABS list specific, others more generally about journal rankings
Mingers, J., & Leydesdorff, L. (2014). Identifying research fields within business and management: A journal cross-citation analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society.
Tourish, D., & Willmott, H. (2015). In Defiance of Folly: Journal rankings, mindless measures and the ABS Guide. Critical Perspectives on Accounting,26, 37-46.
Butler, N., & Spoelstra, S. (2014). The regime of excellence and the erosion of ethos in critical management studies. British Journal of Management, 25(3), 538-550.
Parker, M. (2014). University, Ltd: Changing a business school. Organization,21(2), 281-292.
Moore, L. (2015). Exploring the role of symbolic legitimation in voluntary journal list adoption. Accounting Education, 24(3), 256-273.
Gruber, T. (2014). Academic sell-out: how an obsession with metrics and rankings is damaging academia. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education,24(2), 165-177.
Cluley, R. (2014). Sexual fetishism in organizations: The case of journal list fetishism. Organization, 21(3), 314-328.
Malsch, B., & Tessier, S. (2015). Journal ranking effects on junior academics: Identity fragmentation and politicization. Critical Perspectives on Accounting,26, 84-98.
Brooks, Chris, Evelyn M. Fenton, and James T. Walker. “Gender and the evaluation of research.” Research Policy 43.6 (2014): 990-1001.
Kowalski, T., & Rojon, C. (2014). Industrial–Organizational Psychologists in Business Schools: Insights From a UK Perspective. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 7(3), 370-377.
Beets, S. D., Kelton, A. S., & Lewis, B. R. (2015). An assessment of accounting journal quality based on departmental lists. Scientometrics, 102(1), 315-332.
Roberts, J., & Dörrenbächer, C. (2014). Challenging the orthodox: a decade of critical perspectives on international business. critical perspectives on international business, 10(1/2), 2-20.
Wilkins, S., & Huisman, J. (2015). Stakeholder perspectives on citation and peer-based rankings of higher education journals. Tertiary Education and Management, 21(1), 1-15.
McKinnon, A. C. (2013). Starry-eyed: journal rankings and the future of logistics research. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 43(1), 6-17.
Rafols, I., Leydesdorff, L., O’Hare, A., Nightingale, P., & Stirling, A. (2012). How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between innovation studies and business & management. Research Policy, 41(7), 1262-1282.
Mingers, J., & Willmott, H. (2013). Taylorizing business school research: On the ‘one best way’performative effects of journal ranking lists. Human Relations,66(8), 1051-1073.
Pidd, M., & Broadbent, J. (2015). Business and Management Studies in the 2014 Research Excellence Framework. British Journal of Management.
- Hussain S. Further food for thought on the ABS guide. Accounting Education 2012, 21(1), 17-22.
- Hussain S. Food for thought on the ABS academic journal quality guide. Accounting Education 2011,20(6), 545-559.
- Hussain S. Accounting Journals and the ABS Quality Ratings. The British Accounting Review 2010,42(1), 1-16.
- Liu LYJ, Hussain S, Zuo LY, Wang Y. Journal Rankings, Collaborative Research and Publication Strategies: Evidence from China. Accounting Education 2015, 24(3), 233-255.
- Hussain S. Journal list fetishism and the ‘sign of 4’ in the ABS guide: A question of trust?. Organization2015, 22(1), 119-138.
- Hussain S. Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment: Call for evidence. Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE), 2014. HEFCE’s Independent Review of the Role of Metrics in Research Assessment: Call for Evidence. Submitted.
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/is-the-journal-ratings-game-good-for-researchers/2018702.article (correlation between ABS and REF evaluations approx 50%)