of Business Research
: 1985–1999
Gary A. Knight
FLORIDASTATEUNIVERSITY
G. Tomas M. Hult
FLORIDASTATEUNIVERSITY
R. Edward Bashaw
UNIVERSITY OFARKANSAS ATLITTLEROCK
This article presents a thorough analysis of the research published in the
H
istorically, the contributions of the business profes-sorate have been measured in three areas: research,Journal of Business Research(JBR) during the period of 1985–1999.
teaching, and service. The professor spends a career
First, each article published inJBRwas categorized into a primary content
finding, developing, and communicating the product of an
area according to the broad subject areas covered by the journal’s editorial
academic community’s common scholarship. He or she then
review boards. Marketing represents the largest area with 33% of the
uses and shares this knowledge with the important
constituen-articles, followed by buyer behavior (18%) and international business
cies in which the collective academy is involved.
(16%). Second, the contributing authors during the period of 1985–1999
An integral part of this collection of a discipline’s
knowl-were ranked according to the number of articles they had published in
edge resides in the article publication process (cf. Brewer, 1998;
the journal. William R. Darden was the most published author with 9
Lusch, 1999; Parasuraman, 1998; Stewart, 1999; Varadarajan,
articles, whereas Cynthia Webster was ranked first when adjusting for
1996; Winer, 1998; Woodside, 1997). Articles are presented
coauthorship. A similar analysis was conducted at the institutional level,
for publication in a journal, sent to journal reviewers to control
with Louisiana State University being the top publisher with 27 articles.
for quality, and then selected articles are published and read
Additionally, we examined the impact of the publishedJBRarticles in the
by members of the academic community. The perception of
top 12 journals corresponding to theJBRcontent areas. In this analysis,
a journal’s quality is an important aspect of the “weight” given
we found thatJBRarticles are heavily referenced inJBR,Journal of the
to articles published in a specific journal, and for explaining
Academy of Marketing Science(JAMS),Journal of Marketing (JM),
the article’s ability to contribute to the scholarly dialogue.
Journal of Retailing(JR),Journal of Marketing Research(JMR),Journal
As stated in Zinkhan and Leigh (1999), the quality of a
of International Business Studies(JIBS), andJournal of International
journal is of interest to an academic community for three
Marketing(JIM). Individually, theJBRcontributions by Robert E.
Spek-primary reasons. First, a community wants to discern a
partic-man and Shelby D. Hunt have had the most impact in the 12 journals
ular journal’s role in advancing the discipline’s (and
cross-used in the citation analysis. On the article level, the contribution by Emin
discipline’s) body of knowledge. Second, the perceptions of
Babakus and Gregory W. Boller titled “An Empirical Assessment of the
journal quality serve as surrogate indicators of scholarship
SERVQUAL Scale” (published in 1992) has been the most frequently
refer-quality. As such, publications in more “prestigious” journals
enced article, having been cited 16 times since its publication. J BUSN RES
probably explain most of the differences found in academic
2000. 49.303–314. 2000 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.
rank, pay, and tenure status (cf. Hult and Hasselback, 1998). Third, benefits of publishing in quality journals extend beyond the individual faculty level. The quality of a university, college, and department are all influenced by the quality of journals in which the collective faculty has published. In addition, we believe another reason why journal quality is important is be-cause authors, in attempting to discharge their professorate
Address correspondence to G. Tomas M. Hult, Director of International Busi- duties efficiently and effectively, need to understand both the
ness and Associate Professor of Marketing & International Business, Florida level of scholarship and breadth of contribution required for a State University, College of Business, Tallahassee, FL 32306-1110, USA. E-mail:
thult@cob.fsu.edu manuscript to be “publishable” at a given level of journal quality.
Journal of Business Research 49, 303–314 (2000)
2000 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved. ISSN 0148-2963/00/$–see front matter
Table 1. Percentage ofJBRArticles per Discipline, 1985–1999
Discipline 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 Total %
Buyer behavior 11 2 1 8 3 17 18 7 2 14 11 16 12 20 10 152 18
Finance/accounting 9 10 7 4 6 6 2 5 5 4 0 4 4 2 5 73 9
International business 1 14 5 6 4 4 6 14 10 8 20 7 13 15 13 140 16
Management and organization behavior 7 3 8 2 5 5 2 2 10 9 12 9 3 9 5 91 11
Marketing 11 7 15 12 19 14 7 10 10 31 27 35 29 21 37 285 33
Business and marketing research 4 7 4 16 2 4 9 3 2 3 0 2 4 2 3 65 8
Other 0 1 3 7 1 4 9 2 1 5 0 1 5 2 6 47 5
Total for year and grand totals 43 44 43 55 40 54 53 43 40 74 70 74 70 71 79 853 100
Note: Although an article may fit several categories, each article was assigned to one category based on the most salient category covered in the research.
Reviews of journals and journal content in business disci- the published manuscript, and the quality of the published plines have taken a variety of approaches. For example, mar- research itself. In our study, we attempt to remove a portion keting faculty have been surveyed and asked to rank various of the subjectivity with respect to the role as a research publica-marketing journals whereby the journal’s familiarity and im- tion outlet ofJBR, a cross-disciplinary academic journal, by portance indices were calculated (e.g., Hult, Neese, and Ba- using multiple objective measures. Specifically, we developed shaw, 1997). Risk and insurance productivity of faculty and rankings for number of author publications and coauthor institutions have been measured using a count of journal pages adjustment rankings, author’s employer rankings and coau-attributable to the author and school (Colquitt, Dumm, and thor adjustment rankings, counted the number ofJBRcitations Gustavson, 1998). The number of author contributions has in 12 major journals (including JBR) with topic overlap to been tallied to determine the major contributors to the finance that ofJBR, and then finally ranked the authors and articles literature (Heck and Cooley, 1988). Finally, authors have by number of citations.
examined specific academic journals and academic confer-ences in an attempt to better understand the quality and
Citation Analysis and
contributions of those particular outlets (e.g., Bashaw and
Grant, 1992; Inkpen and Beamish, 1994; Malhotra, 1996).
Journal Quality
These subjective and objective measures, although notindi-Zinkhan and Leigh (1999) listed six ways in which journal vidually all encompassing, may collectively help one form a
quality assessments can be made. They are as follows: who fairly accurate assessment of the role authors, journals, and
publishes the journal (commercial or academic), the reputa-institutions play in contributing to the scholarly dialogue.
tion of the editor and/or the editorial board members, the Beyond simple counting, one objective measure of the quality
reputation of the authors publishing in the journal, the accep-of contributions made accep-of published articles is the citations that
tance rate of the journal, the age of the journal, and the impact appear in these published journal articles (Salancik, 1986). By
of the journal in the academic community. We focus primarily being used to further a particle knowledge system of a
disci-on the more objective measures in trying to assess the impact pline, those articles cited may be of particular interest as a
ofJBR. We identify the most prolific authors publishing in quality variable. Possible levels of analysis using citations
JBR as a means of communicating their achievement to the found in journal articles could be any of the following: articles,
academic community, and to let the reader determine the journals, individuals, departments, and institutions.
quality of the journal author contributors. We also evaluate
TheJournal of Business Research(JBR) is a unique academic
the impact JBRhas had in the academic business discipline journal. Rather than focusing on a single discipline or even a
via the use of citation analysis. subdiscipline,JBRcontains articles of interest to academics in
“Citations are explicit linkages between articles that have marketing (and many of its subdisciplines), strategic
manage-common aspects,” (Chandy and Williams, 1994, p. 716). This ment, organizational behavior, international business,
ac-serves as an extremely critical link in building a knowledge counting, and finance. Because of the wide variety of topics
base in any discipline and is one of the foundations upon covered, its high regard in the marketing discipline (Hult,
which the scientific method is built. Citation analysis has been Neese, and Bashaw, 1997), and the international author
con-widely accepted in many business disciplines. For example, tributions to the journal, we launched a thorough investigation
citation research has been conducted in accounting (Bricker, ofJBR contributions during the 1985–1999 period.
1988; Brown and Gardner, 1985), economics (Davis and Papa-In valuing a professor’s contributions, much subjectivity
nek, 1984; Liebowitz and Palmer, 1984), finance (Chung and is involved. In scholarly research, value is placed on the
Table 2. Ranking of Authors Published inJBR, 1985–1999 As outlined by Zinkhan, Roth, and Saxton (1992), citations
are to be considered social exchanges between the authors
Number of Total Number
and readers. Knowledge found in journal articles is valued to
Rank Author Articles of Authors
the degree they are used to understand newly formed issues
1 Darden, William R. 9 22 by journal readers and to build new knowledge in writing 2 Woodside, Arch G. 8 16 manuscripts by journal authors. In short, business discipline
3 Bearden, William O. 8 20
authors and publication outlets are valued and given status
4 Dubinsky, Alan J. 8 23
in the community of other business researchers by publishing
5 Goldsmith, Ronald E. 7 14
6 Johnston, Wesley J. 7 15 articles that are used by other researchers.
7 Ferrell, O. C. 7 18 A citation represents a recording of the use of an idea in 7 Varadarajan, P. Rajan 7 18 the development of new knowledge in journal articles. It is
9 Lumpkin, James R. 7 19
an acknowledgement by the citing authors of the use of a
10 Spekman, Robert E. 6 13
particular article, and by extension can be seen as a quality
11 Babin, Barry J. 6 15
12 Futrell, Charles M. 6 17 indicator. “Valuable” articles will be cited and will launch and
12 Vitell, Scott J. 6 17 aid new research and publication efforts. A journal that is 14 Domanski, Tomasz 5 7 frequently cited is used frequently, and is held in high regard
15 Graham, John L. 5 11
by the community of scholars reading and publishing in the
15 Morris, Michael H. 5 11
journal. In addition, and by extension, that journal would be
15 Wilson, Elizabeth J. 5 11
18 Chebat, Jean-Charles 5 13 more likely to attract new manuscripts from authors.Ceteris
18 Malhotra, Naresh 5 13 paribus, more manuscripts mean more competition for scarce 20 Brenes, Esteban R. 5 16 publication space in the journal that eventually leads to a
20 Barnes, James H. 5 17
higher quality journal. In our study, we use citation analysis
20 Swan, John E. 5 19
to identifyJBRarticles cited in 11 other business journals, the
23 Webster, Cynthia 4 5
24 Samiee, Saeed 4 6 most cited authors, and the most cited journal articles.
25 Dominguez, Luis V. 4 8
26 Hite, Robert E. 4 8
26 Hu, Michael Y. 4 8
Methodology and Results
26 Wilson, David T. 4 8
29 Hunt, Shelby D. 4 9 The objective of our study was to closely examine research 29 Kahle, Lynn R. 4 9 published inJBRduring the period of 1985–1999. Specifically,
29 Lewin, Jeffrey E. 4 9
we addressed the following six research questions:
32 Kotabe, Masaaki 4 10
32 Laroche, Michel 4 10 1. What proportion of the journal’s content is represented
32 Marr, M. Wayne 4 10
by the various business disciplines?
32 Robicheaux, Robert A. 4 10
2. What authors have most frequently published in the
32 Samli, A. Coskun 4 10
37 Hill, Ronald Paul 4 11 journal?
37 Pelton, Lou E. 4 11 3. What institutions have most frequently contributed
arti-37 Strutton, David 4 11 cles to the journal?
40 Lehmann, Donald R. 4 12
4. How often areJBRarticles cited inJBRand the 11 other
40 Parasuraman, A. 4 12
major journals that represent discipline content areas
40 Rose, Randall L. 4 12
40 Skinner, Steven J. 4 12 inJBR?
44 Walker, Beth A. 4 13 5. Who are the most citedJBRauthors?
45 Wright, Peter 4 14
6. What are the most citedJBR articles?
46 Powers, Thomas L. 4 17
By answering the above research questions, we believe that
Note 1: Arch G. Woodside is editor of theJBR. Three of the articles listed for him are we offer the reader objective information with which to deter-introductions to specialJBRissues.
Note 2: Authors are ranked first by the number of articles produced, and second by mine their perception as to the level of quality ofJBRand its the total number of authors involved in those articles. authorship.
Note 3: The remaining authors who published in theJournal of Business Reviewhad
three or fewer articles. Fifty-eight authors have published three articles inJBR, 159 While not completely so, we somewhat arbitrarily chose authors have published two articles inJBR, and 590 authors have published one article to examine the last 15 years ofJBR. Understanding that the inJBRduring the 1985–1999 period.
citation usage of a journal article fades with time, we decided not to examine each articleJBRhas ever published. However, we were guided to use 15 years from the notion of an article’s (e.g., Cote, Leong, and Cote, 1991; Jobber and Simpson,
cited half-life; that is, the durability or timeliness of the useful 1988; Robinson and Adler, 1981; Spake and Harmon, 1997;
knowledge contained in journal articles (Zinkhan and Leigh, Zinkhan and Leigh, 1999), and operations research (Back,
Table 3. Ranking of Authors Published inJBR, Adjusted Authorship, 1985–1999
Number Total Number Adjustment Rank Author of Articles of Authors Factor
1 Webster, Cynthia 4 5 .80
2 Domanski, Tomasz 5 7 .71
3 Samiee, Saeed 4 6 .67
4 Woodside, Arch G. 8 16 .50
5 Goldsmith, Ronald E. 7 14 .50
6 Dominguez, Luis V. 4 8 .50
7 Hite, Robert E. 4 8 .50
8 Hu, Michael Y. 4 8 .50
9 Wilson, David T. 4 8 .50
10 Johnston, Wesley J. 7 15 .47
11 Spekman, Robert E. 6 13 .46
12 Graham, John L. 5 11 .45
13 Morris, Michael H. 5 11 .45
14 Wilson, Elizabeth J. 5 11 .45
15 Hunt, Shelby D. 4 9 .44
16 Kahle, Lynn R. 4 9 .44
17 Lewin, Jeffrey E. 4 9 .44
18 Darden, William R. 9 22 .41
19 Bearden, William O. 8 20 .40
20 Babin, Barry J. 6 15 .40
21 Kotabe, Masaaki 4 10 .40
22 Laroche, Michel 4 10 .40
23 Marr, M. Wayne 4 10 .40
24 Robicheaux, Robert A. 4 10 .40
25 Samli, A. Coskun 4 10 .40
26 Ferrell, O. C. 7 18 .39
27 Varadarajuan, P. Rajan 7 18 .39
28 Chebat, Jean-Charles 5 13 .39
29 Malhotra, Maresh 5 13 .39
30 Lumpkin, James R. 7 19 .37
31 Hill, Ronald Paul 4 11 .36
32 Pelton, Lou E. 4 11 .36
33 Strutton, David 4 11 .36
34 Dubinsky, Alan J. 8 23 .35
35 Futrell, Charles M. 6 17 .35
36 Vitell, Scott J. 6 17 .35
37 Lehmann, Donald R. 4 12 .33
38 Parasuraman, A. 4 12 .33
39 Rose, Randall L. 4 12 .33
40 Skinner, Steven J. 4 12 .33
41 Brenes, Esteban R. 5 16 .31
42 Walker, Beth A. 4 13 .31
43 Barnes, James H. 5 17 .29
44 Wright, Peter 4 14 .29
45 Swan, John E. 5 19 .26
46 Powers, Thomas L. 4 17 .24
Note 1: Arch G. Woodside is editor ofJBR. Three of his articles are introductions to specialJBRissues.
Note 2: The remaining authors has three or fewer articles inJBR. Only authors with four or more articles inJBRare listed.
Note 3: For a total of two authors, the number of articles is multiplied by .50; for a total of three authors, the number of articles is multiplied by .33, and so on.
Advertising (Zinkhan and Leigh, 1999); thus, we chose to and classified its content as one of six business discipline
categories (a seventh category was “other”). In beginning the examine 15 years ofJBRarticles.
Initially, sinceJBRis a multidisciplinary academic business process of choosing these categories, we were first guided by the disciplinary make-up ofJBR’s editorial board. Each article journal, we wanted to know the various contributions of each
discipline, in terms of publishedJBRarticles over the chosen was physically sorted by content. Categories were refined and articles sorted until six content categories emerged, as well as time span. In answering the first research question, we
Table 4. Ranking of Employers of Authors Published inJBR, 1985–1999
Number Total Number Rank Institution of Articles of Authors
1 Louisiana State University 27 78
2 Texas A & M University 20 90
3 University of South Carolina 19 64
4 University of Southern California 17 40
5 Georgia State University 17 52
6 University of Memphis 17 62
7 University of Lodz 16 28
8 University of Texas, Austin 15 39
9 Michigan State University 15 47
10 Florida State University 14 43
11 University of Mississippi 14 72
12 Baylor University 13 33
13 University of Miami 13 35
14 Pennsylvania State University 13 43
15 Columbia University 13 47
16 Indiana University 12 37
16 Tulane University 12 37
18 University of Alabama 12 38
19 Virginia Polytechnic 12 44
20 Arizona State University 11 11
21 University of Cincinnati 11 33
22 Florida Atlantic University 10 28
23 University of Houston 10 31
24 Concordia University 10 33
25 University of Maryland 10 50
26 INCAE 10 67
27 University of Alabama, Birmingham 10 81
28 University of Illinois, Urbana 9 21
29 Georgia Institute of Technology 9 22
30 Iowa State University 9 27
31 Washington State University 9 29
32 University of Kentucky 9 36
33 University of Arkansas 9 38
34 Baruch College, CUNY 7 19
34 Northeastern University 7 19
36 University of North Texas 8 19
37 University of Central Florida 8 21
38 University of Delaware 8 25
39 Clemson University 8 35
40 University of Colorado, Boulder 7 15
40 University of Connecticut 7 15
40 University of Oregon 7 15
43 Mississippi State University 7 16
44 University of Toledo 7 17
45 Boston University 7 20
45 University of Utah 7 20
47 Kansas State University 7 21
48 Bradley University 7 23
49 Texas Tech University 7 25
50 University of Georgia 7 31
Note 1: Employer refers to the institution where the author(s) was employed at the time of publication.
Note 2: Employers are ranked first by the number of articles produced, and second by the total number of authors involved in those articles. Note 3: The remaining employers had six or fewer articles inJBR.
Table 1 provides the complete article category classification proportion of marketing articles has increased over the last 5 years, representing 41% of the articles in this time period. and the number of articles published, by year, in each of the
Table 5. Ranking of Employers of Authors Published inJBR, Adjusted Authorship, 1985–1999
Number Total Number Adjustment Rank Institution of Articles of Authors Factor
1 University of Lodz, Poland 16 28 .57
2 University of Colorado, Boulder 7 15 .47
3 University of Connecticut 7 15 .47
4 University of Oregon 7 15 .47
5 Mississippi State University 7 16 .44
6 University of Southern California 17 40 .43
7 University of Illinois, Urbana 9 21 .43
8 University of North Texas 8 19 .42
9 Georgia Institute of Technology 9 22 .41
10 University of Toledo 7 17 .41
11 Baylor University 13 33 .39
12 University of Texas, Austin 15 39 .38
13 University of Central Florida 8 21 .38
14 University of Miami 13 35 .37
15 Baruch College, CUNY 7 19 .37
16 Northeastern University 7 19 .37
17 Florida Atlantic University 10 28 .36
18 Louisiana State University 27 78 .35
19 University of Utah 7 20 .35
20 Boston University 7 20 .35
21 Georgia State University 17 52 .33
22 Florida State University 14 43 .33
23 University of Cincinnati 11 33 .33
24 Iowa State University 9 27 .33
25 Kansas State University 7 21 .33
26 Michigan State University 15 47 .32
27 Indiana University 12 37 .32
28 Tulane University 12 37 .32
29 University of Alabama 12 38 .32
30 University of Houston 10 31 .32
31 University of Delaware 8 25 .32
32 Washington State University 9 29 .31
33 University of South Carolina 19 64 .30
34 Pennsylvania State University 13 43 .30
35 Concordia University 10 33 .30
36 Bradley University 7 23 .30
37 Columbia University 13 47 .28
38 Texas Tech University 7 25 .28
39 University of Memphis 17 62 .27
40 Virginia Polytechnic 12 44 .27
41 University of Kentucky 9 36 .25
42 University of Arkansas 9 38 .24
43 Arizona State University 11 47 .23
44 Clemson University 8 35 .23
45 University of Georgia 7 31 .23
46 Texas A&M University 20 90 .22
47 University of Maryland 10 50 .20
48 University of Mississippi 14 72 .19
49 INCAE 10 67 .15
50 University of Alabama, Birmingham 10 81 .12
Note 1: Employer refers to the institution where the author(s) was employed at the time of publication. Note 2: The remaining employers have six or fewer articles inJBR
Note 3: For two authors, the number of articles is multiplied by .50; for three authors, the number of articles is multiplied by .33, and so on.
Accounting, which dropped to 4% over this period (from we simply counted the articles that list them as an author and noted the total number of coauthors for each article. We 9%), and Business/Marketing Research, which dropped to 3%
(from 8%). defined an article as being any published full “regular” article,
Table 6. Citation Impact: The 12 Investigated Journals
Journal PrimaryJBRArea Covered
Journal of Business Research All
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science Marketing
Journal of Advertising Buyer behavior
Journal of Consumer Research Buyer behavior
Journal of Marketing Marketing
Journal of Marketing Research Business and marketing research
Journal of Retailing Buyer behavior and marketing
Journal of International Marketing International business
Journal of International Business Studies International business
Academy of Management Journal Strategic management and organizational behavior Strategic Management Journal Strategic management and organizational behavior
Journal of Accounting and Economics Finance and accounting
note that we counted as articles several of the editor’s or guest institutions were listed with 7 or moreJBRarticles in the 15-year time period.
editor’s introductions to special issues. It is our experience
that these introductions often launch meaningful research Table 5 summarizes the adjusted ranking of institutions similar to Table 3 for the individual author. It includes those endeavors and are frequently cited. Table 2 presents the raw
article count for the topJBRcontributors along with the total same 50 institutions with 7 or more published articles during the 15-year time period examined. This ranking is based on number of authors represented by their work. We ranked
them first according to total number of articles and then based an adjustment factor that considers the total number of authors involved with the published articles. As has been mentioned, on the total number of authors. A contributor is ranked higher
if, given the same number of published articles, the articles this recognizes, and adjusts for, that portion of the article attributable to the institution alone. We derived the adjust-had fewer total authors. The late William R. Darden, with
nine articles, has published the most articles over the 15-year ment factor by dividing the total number of articles by the total number of authors. Based on this adjustment, the University of period, followed closely by Woodside, Bearden, and Dubinsky
with eight articles. In all, 46 authors have published four or Lodz, in Poland, had the highest adjustment factor of .57. Long-timeJBR readers will note that in two special issues— more articles during this time span.
Table 3 is a re-ranking of those 46 authors with four or Research in marketing in a Centrally Planned Economy: Po-land” [14 (4), (1986)] and “Marketing in Poland in a Centrally more published articles during the 15-year time period
exam-ined. This ranking is based on an adjustment factor that con- Planned Economy” [24 (1), (1992)]—many of the authors were from the University of Lodz. The University of Colorado– siders the total number of authors involved with the published
articles. This recognizes that an author has contributed more, Boulder, the University of Connecticut, and the University of Oregon all had the next highest adjustment factor of .47. individually, with a single author article than with a
multiau-thor paper. The adjustment factor was derived by dividing In Table 6, we present the list of 12 journals (including JBR) that we investigated to better understand the impact of the total number of articles by the total number of authors.
Using this factor, Cynthia Webster was the highest ratedJBR JBR on the academic business discipline. The journals we selected correspond to the content areas mentioned in Table contributing author with an adjustment factor of .80, followed
by Tomasz Domanski with an adjustment factor of .71. 1. The number of journals to be included in the citation analysis for each topic was loosely determined by the number Tables 4 and 5 are rankings of institutions based on the
author’s affiliation at the time of article publication. Table 4 of review board members for that topic (i.e., the more review board members, the more journals selected for that particular represents the “raw” ranking similar to Table 2 for the
individ-ual author. As shown in Table 4, Louisiana State University field for the citation analysis). Table 7 lists the number ofJBR citations found in each of the listed journals by the journals (LSU) is the leading institutional contributor toJBR during
the 1985–1999 time period, with 27 articles being published publishing date by year and total. As might be expected, the journal with the mostJBRcitations wasJBR, with 289 citations. by at least one author with an LSU affiliation. The ranking is
based, first, on number of articles, and second, on total num- TheJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science was second with 90 citations, followed by theJournal of Marketing with ber of authors. The notion was that the fewer the number
of authors, the greater the institutional impact. Texas A&M 75 citations.
Table 8 lists, in order of rank, authors who had the highest University was second with 20 articles, followed closely by
Table 8. Highest-Impact Authors in JBR, Ranked by Number of Citations in the 12 Journals, 1985–1999
Raw Number of Rank Author Citations in 12 Journals
1 Spekman, Robert E. 19
Note 1: The remaining authors had six or fewer citations in the 12 journals.
raw citations found in the 12 investigated journals. Robert E. Spekman and Shelby D. Hunt had the highest total citations in the 12 journals, with 19 citations each. Spekman and Hunt were closely followed by Lawrence B. Chonko, who had a total of 18 citations. In total, 44 authors were listed with 7 or more citations.
In Table 9 we ranked the authors by adjusted number of citations, and then by adjusted number ofJBR articles. The
Table
Table 9. Highest-Impact Authors inJBR, Ranked by Adjusted Number of Citations in the 12 Journals, 1990–1999
Raw Number Adjusted Number Number of Adjusted Number Rank Author of Citations of Citations Articles inJBR Articles inJBR
1 Gro¨nroos, Christian 12 12.00 2 1
2 George, William 10 10.00 1 1
3 Campbell, N. C. G. 9 9.00 1 1
4 Czepiel, John A. 9 9.00 2 0.67
5 Babakus, Emin 16 8.00 2 0.40
5 Boller, Gregory W. 16 8.00 2 0.40
7 Naor, Jacob 10 5.00 1 0.50
8 Chonko, Lawrence B. 18 3.60 2 0.40
9 Lant, Theresa K. 7 3.50 1 0.50
9 Loken, Barbara 7 3.50 1 0.50
11 Spekman, Robert E. 19 3.17 6 0.46
12 Hunt, Shelby D. 19 2.71 4 0.44
13 Cavusgil, S. Tamer 17 2.43 3 0.43
14 Graham, John L. 14 2.33 5 0.45
15 Danes, Jeffrey E. 7 2.33 1 0.33
15 Hunt, Kenneth A. 7 2.33 1 0.33
17 Sriram, Ven 7 2.33 2 0.40
18 Mentzer, John T. 7 2.33 3 0.43
16 Sager, Jeffrey K. 16 2.29 3 0.33
20 Samiee, Saeed 9 2.25 4 0.67
21 Johnston, Mark W. 16 1.78 3 0.33
22 Biswas, Abhijit 7 1.75 3 0.50
23 Babin, Barry J. 10 1.67 6 0.40
24 Johnston, Wesley J. 10 1.67 7 0.47
25 McGrath, Mary Ann 8 1.60 2 0.40
26 Beatty, Sharon E. 12 1.50 3 0.38
26 Homer, Pamela 12 1.50 3 0.38
28 Parasuraman, A. 13 1.44 4 0.33
29 Futrell, Charles M. 17 1.42 7 0.41
30 Moore, William L. 7 1.40 3 0.43
31 Chambers, Terry M. 8 1.33 2 0.33
31 Krapfel, Robert E. 8 1.33 3 0.33
33 Varadarajan, P. Rajan 16 1.33 7 0.39
34 Darden, William R. 13 1.30 9 0.38
35 Dubinsky, Alan J. 14 1.08 8 0.35
36 Gannon, Martin J. 7 1.00 2 0.29
36 Grimm, Curtis 7 1.00 2 0.29
36 Smith, Ken G. 7 1.00 2 0.29
39 Goldsmith, Ronald E. 7 1.00 7 0.50
40 Wilson, Elizabeth J. 10 0.91 5 0.45
41 Bearden, William O. 9 0.90 8 0.40
42 Robicheaux, Robert A. 7 0.88 4 0.40
43 Lumpkin, James R. 7 0.64 7 0.37
44 Ferrell, O. C. 8 0.62 7 0.39
Note 1: Authors are ranked first by the adjusted number of citations, and second by the adjusted number of articles.
Note 2: For two authors, the number of citations/articles is multiplied by 0.50; For three authors, the number is multiplied by 0.33, and so on. Only cited articles are included.
total number of citations for each article by the fraction of Table 10 is a ranking of the most influential JBR articles during the 15-year period examined. A total of 11 articles the article represented by that author. For example, a
single-authored article had 1.0 as the multiplier, an article with two during this period have been cited 8 times or more. The most cited article was written by Emin Babakus and Gregory W. authors had .5 as the multiplier, and an article with three
authors had .33 as the multiplier, and so on. The previously Boller, entitled “An Empirical Assessment of the SERVQUAL Scale” [24 (3), (1992)]. The fact that the article by Babakus and explained adjusted number of articles inJBRwas used as the
tie-breaker in the rankings. Christian Gro¨nroos was ranked Boller appeared midway through the time period examined (1985–1999) lends additional support to the article’s quality highest with 12 adjusted citations, whereas William George
Table 10. Most InfluentialJBRArticles, 1985–1999
Number of Citations in
Rank Article the 12 Journals
1 Babakus, Emin, and Boller, Gregory W.: An Empirical Assessment of the SERVQUAL Scale. 16 24(3), (1992): 253–268.
2 Chonko, Lawrence B., and Hunt, Shelby D.: Ethics and Marketing Management: An Empirical 14 Examination. 13(4), (1985): 339–360.
3 Graham, John L.: The Problem-Solving Approach to Negotiations in Industrial Marketing. 13 14(6), (1986): 549–566.
4 Gro¨nroos, Christian: Relationship Approach to Marketing in Service Contexts: The Marketing 12 and Organizational Behavior Interface. 20(1), (1990): 3–12.
5 George, William: Internal Marketing and Organizational Behavior: A Partnership in Developing 10 Customer-Conscious Employees at Every Level. 20(1), (1990): 63–70.
5 Johnston, Mark W., Parasuraman, A., Futrell, Charles M., and Sager, Jeffrey. Performance and 10 Job Satisfaction Effects on Salesperson Turnover: A Replication and Extension. 16(1), (1988):
67–84.
7 Campbell, N. C. G.: An Interaction Approach to Organizational Buying Behavior. 13(1), (1985): 9 35–48.
7 Cavusgil, S. Tamer, and Naor, Jacob: Firm and Management Characteristics as Discriminators of 9 Export Marketing Activity. 15(1987): 221–235.
7 Czepiel, John A.: Service Encounters and Service Relationships: Implications for Research. 9 20(1), (1990): 13–22.
10 Samiee, Saeed, and Walters, Peter G. P.: Influence of Firm Size on Export Planning and 8 Performance. 20(3), (1990): 235–248.
10 Spekman, Robert E, and Johnston, Wesley J.: Relationship Management: Managing the Selling 8 and the Buying Interface. 14(6), (1986): 519–532.
of the articles inJBRis improving. The second most citedJBR and 5% other topics).JBR’s strong international business focus is indicated by its authorship and topic coverage (16% of all article was written by Lawrence B. Chonko and Shelby D.
Hunt, entitled “Ethics and Marketing Management: An Empir- articles published during the 1985–1999 time period exam-ined), with a trend toward increasing this focus during the ical Examination” [13 (4), (1985)].
In Table 11 we present the most cited articles for each last 5 years.
Another noteworthy point is the “partnership” betweenJBR of three 5-year time intervals: 1985–1989, 1990–1994, and
and the Society for Marketing Advances. This partnership has 1995–1999. This makes for a “natural adjustment,” as newly
resulted inJBR being viewed as one of the premier journals published articles have less time to make an impact than
in the field of marketing, accounting for 33% of the articles longer published articles. For the 1985–1989 time period
published inJBRduring the time period of 1985–1999, with the previously mentioned Chonko and Hunt article ranked
a quality ranking of number eight in the marketing discipline highest with 14 citations. For the 1990–1994 time period the
(Hult, Neese, and Bashaw, 1997). The quality ranking within Babakus and Boller article led with 16 citations. Finally, for
the marketing field is noteworthy, especially in light ofJBR’s the most recent time period, 1995–1999, the article by Lois
interdisciplinary focus. In fact,JBRhas maintained this promi-A. Mohr and Mary Jo Bitner, entitled “The Role of Employee
nent position during the decade-and-a-half examined (1985– Effort in Satisfaction with Service Transactions” [32 (3),
1999), as indicated in ranking studies in 1987 (Luke and (1995)], led with six citations.
Doke, 1987) and 1997 (Hult, Neese, and Bashaw, 1997). In summary,JBRhas become a natural home for interdisci-plinary research and research in a variety of functional business disciplines. If the last 15 years are an indication,JBRis well
Conclusion
positioned to retain and perhaps increase its quality reputationand leadership position among academic business journals. One of the most important conclusions that can be drawn
from the results reported in this study is the fact thatJBRis truly an international interdisciplinary journal. The interdisci-plinary nature ofJBRis reflected in its published articles (18% buyer behavior, 9% finance/accounting, 16% international
We gratefully acknowledge the helpful suggestions of Randy Dumm, and the
business, 11% strategic management and organizational
be-data collection assistance of Mari Knight.
Table 11. Most InfluentialJBRArticles, 1985–89, 1990–94, and 1995–99
Number of Citations
Rank, Article 1985–1989 1990–1994 1995–1999 Total
1985–1989 1 Chonko, Lawrence B., and Hunt, Shelby D.: Ethics and Marketing
Management: An Empirical Examination. 13(4), (1985): 339–360. 4 6 4 14
2 Graham, John I.: The Problem-Solving Approach to Negotiations in
Industrial Marketing. 14(6), (1986): 549–566. 4 6 3 13
3 Johnston, Mark W., Parasuraman, A., Futrell, Charles M., and Sager, Jeffrey. Performance and Job Satisfaction Effects on Salesperson
Turnover: A Replication and Extension. 16(1), (1988): 67–84. 1 8 1 10
4 Campbell, N. C. G.: An Interaction Approach to Organizational
Buying Behavior. 13(1), (1985): 35–48. 1 6 2 9
4 Cavusgil, S. Tamer, and Naor, Jacob: Firm and Management Characteristics as Discriminators of Export Marketing Activity.
15(1987): 221–235. 4 5 9
5 Spekman, Robert E., and Johnston, Wesley, J.: Relationship Management: Managing the Selling and the Buying Interface. 14(6),
(1986): 519–532. 2 4 2 8
1990–1994 1 Babakus, Emin, and Boller, Gregory W.: An Empirical Assessment of
the SERVQUAL Scale. 24(3), (1992): 253–268. 6 10 16
2 Gro¨nroos, Christian: Relationship Approach to Marketing in Service Contexts: The Marketing and Organizational Behavior Interface.
20(1), (1990): 3–12. 2 10 12
3 George, William: Internal Marketing and Organizational Behavior: A Partnership in Developing Customer-Conscious Employees at Every
Level. 20(1), (1990): 63–70. 2 8 10
4 Czepiel, John A.: Service Encounters and Service Relationships:
Implications for Research. 20(1), (1990): 13–22. 1 8 9
5 Samiee, Saeed, and Walters, Peter G. P.: Influence of Firm Size on
Export Planning and Performance. 20(3), (1990): 235–248. 2 6 8
6 Sriram, Ven, Krapfel, Robert, and Spekman, Robert. Antecedents to Buyer-Seller Collaboration: An Analysis from the Buyer’s Perspective.
25(4), (1992): 303–320. 7 7
6 Darden, William R., and Babin, Barry J. Exploring the Concept of Affective Quality: Expanding the Concept of Retail Personality. 29(2),
(1994): 101–110. 7 7
1995–1999 1 Mohr, Lois A., and Bitner, Mary Jo. The Role of Employee Effort in
Satisfaction with Service Transactions. 32(3), (1995): 239–252. 6 6
2 Singhapakdi, Anusorn, Vitell, Scott J., and Kraft, Kenneth. Moral Intensity and Ethical Decision-Making of Marketing Professionals.
36(3), (1996): 245–256. 5 5
3 Boyle, Brett A., and F. Robert Dwyer. Power, Bureaucracy, Influence and Performance: Their Relationships in Industrial Distribution
Channels. 32(3), (1995): 189–200. 4 4
3 Young, Joyce A., Gilbert, Faye W., and McIntyre, Faye S. An Investigation of Relationalism across a Range of Marketing
Relationships and Alliances. 35(2), (1996): 139–152. 4 4
4 Robin, Donald P., Reidenbach, R. Eric, and Forrest, P. J. The Perceived Importance of the Ethical Decision-making of Ad
Managers. 35(1), (1996): 17–28. 3 3
Jobber, David, and Simpson, Paul: A Citation Analysis of Selected
References
Marketing Journals.International Journal of Research in Marketing Back, Harry B.: A Comparison of Operations Research and Manage- 5 (1988): 137–142.
ment Science Based on Bibliographic Citations. Interfaces 4
Liebowitz, Stanley J., and Palmer, John P.: Assessing the Relative (1974): 42–45.
Impacts of Economic Journals.Journal of Economic Literature22 Bashaw, R. Edward, and Grant, E. Stephen: An Analysis of Leading (1984): 77–88.
Contributors to the SMA’s Proceedings: 1973–1991, inMarketing:
Luke, Robert H., and Doke, E. Reed: Marketing Journal Hierarchies:
Perspectives for the 1990’s, Robert L. King, ed., Southern Marketing
Faculty Perceptions, 1986–1987.Journal of the Academy of Market-Association, New Orleans, LA. 1992, pp. 192–196.
ing Science15 (1987): 74–78.
Brewer, Thomas L.: Letter from the New Editor.Journal of
Interna-Lusch, Robert F.: From the Editor.Journal of Marketing63 (October
tional Business Studies29 (1998): vi–ii.
1999): 1. Bricker, Robert J.: Knowledge Preservation in Accounting: A
Cita-Malhotra, Naresh K.: The Impact of the Academy of Marketing Sci-tional Study.Abacus24 (1988): 120–131.
ence on Marketing Scholarship: An Analysis of the Research Pub-Brown, Lawrence D., and Gardner, John C.: Applying Citation Analy- lished inJAMS. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 24
sis to Evaluate the Research Contributions of Accounting Faculty (1996): 291–298. and Doctoral Programs.Accounting Review60 (1985): 262–277.
Parasuraman, A.: Editorial.Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science Chandy, P. R., and Williams, Thomas G. E.: The Impact of Journals 26 (Winter 1998): 3–5.
and Authors on International Business Research: A Citational
Robinson, Larry M., and Adler, Roy: Measuring the Impact of Market-Analysis ofJIBS Articles.Journal of International Business Studies
ing Scholars and Institutions: An Analysis of Citation Frequency. 25 (1994): 715–728.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science9 (1981): 147–162.
Chung, Kee H., and Cox, Raymond: Patterns of Productivity in Salancik, G. R.: An Index of Subgroup Influence in Dependency Finance Literature: A Study of the Bibliometric Distributions. Networks.Administrative Science Quarterly31 (1986): 194–211.
Journal of Finance45 (1990): 301–309.
Spake, Deborah F., and Harmon, Susan K.: Assessing Productivity Colquitt, L. Lee, Dumm, Randy E., and Gustavson, Sandra G.: Risk Based on Publication in the Top Four Marketing Journals, 1990– and Insurance Research Productivity: 1987–1996.Journal of Risk 1996: A Multiple Method Approach, inEnhancing Knowledge
De-and Insurance65 (1998): 711–742. velopment in Marketing(Vol. 8), William M. Pride, and G. Tomas
Cote, Joseph A., Leong, Siew M., and Cote, John: Assessing the M. Hult, eds., American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL. Influence of Journal of Consumer Research: A Citation Analysis. 1997, pp. 191–198.
Journal of Consumer Research18 (1991): 402–410. Stewart, David W.: Beginning Again: Change and Renewal in
Intellec-Davis, Paul, and Papanek, Gustav G.: Faculty Ratings of Major Eco- tual Communities.Journal of Marketing63 (October 1999): 2–4. nomics Departments by Citation.American Economic Review74 Varadarajan, P. Rajan: From the Editor: Reflections on Research and (1984): 225–230. Publishing.Journal of Marketing60 (October 1996): 3–6. Heck, Jean Louis, and Cooley, Philip: Most Frequent Contributors Winer, Russell S.: From the Editor.Journal of Marketing Research35
to the Finance Literature.Financial ManagementAutumn (1988): (February 1998): iii–iv. 100–108.
Woodside, Arch G.: Contributions of Business-to-Business Marketing Hult, G. Tomas M., and Hasselback, James R.: A Report of Gender Journals: Introduction to the Special Issue. Journal of Business
and Professional Age of the Marketing Professorate. Journal of Research38 (March 1997): 177.
Marketing Education20 (1998): 35–40.
Zinkhan, George M., Roth, Martin, and Saxton, Mary Jane: Knowl-Hult, G. Tomas M., Neese, William T., and Bashaw, R. Edward: edge Development and Scientific Status in Consumer Behavior Faculty Perceptions of Marketing Journals.Journal of Marketing Research: A Social Exchange Perspective. Journal of Consumer
Education19 (1997): 37–52. Research18 (1992), 282–291.
Inkpen, Andrew C., and Beamish, Paul W.: An Analysis of Twenty- Zinkhan, George M., and Leigh, Thomas W.: Assessing the Quality Five Years of Research in the Journal of International Business Ranking of the Journal of Advertising, 1986–1997. Journal of
Studies. Journal of International Business Studies25 (1994): 703– Advertising28 (1999): 51–63.
713. Zivney, Terry L., and Bertin, William J.: Publish or Perish: What
Jensen, Michael C.: Citation Index Ratings of the Journal of Financial the Competition is Really Doing.Journal of Finance47 (1992): 295–329.
