Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

OR/MS journals evaluation based on a refined PageRank method: an updated and more comprehensive review

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to furnish the OR/MS research community with an updated assessment of the discipline’s journals set with refinements that also highlight the various characteristics of OR/MS journals. More specifically, we apply a refined PageRank method initially proposed by Xu et al. (2011) to evaluate the top 31 OR/MS journals for 2010, and report our findings. We also report the shifts in the rankings that span 5 years, from 2006 to 2010. We observe that Manufacturing and Service Operations Management, indexed by the SCI only in 2008, is a specialized journal that is consistently highly regarded within the discipline. The rankings also suggest that Management Science is more established as a generalized journal as it has more external impact. In general, our ranking results correlate with expert opinions, and we also observe, report and discuss some interesting patterns that have emerged over the past 5 years from 2006 to 2010.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Past studies based on peer surveys include Saladin (1985), (Barman et al. 1991), (Barman et al. 2001), (Olson 2005).

References

  • Agrawal, V. K., Agrawal, V., & Rungtusanatham, M. (2011). Theoretical and interpretation challenges to using the author affiliation index method to rank journals. Production and Operations Management, 20(2), 280–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barman, S., Hanna, M. D., & LaForge, R. L. (2001). Perceived relevance and quality of POM journals: a decade later. Journal of Operations Management, 19(3), 367–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barman, S., Tersine, R. J., & Buckley, M. R. (1991). An empirical assessment of the perceived relevance and quality of POM-related journals by academicians. Journal of Operations Management, 10(2), 194–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bressan, M., & Peserico, E. (2010). Choose the damping, choose the ranking? Journal of Discrete Algorithms, 8(2), 199–213.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Brin, S., & Page, L. (1998). The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual Web search engine. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 30(1), 107–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, D. (2008). Free journal-ranking tool enters citation market. Nature, 451(7174), 6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheang, B., Chu, S. K. W., Li, C., & Lim, A, (2014). A multidimensional approach to evaluating management journals: Refining PageRank via the differentiation of citation types and identifying the roles that management journals play. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, Accepted, forthcoming.

  • Chen, C. R., & Huang, Y. (2007). Author affiliation index, finance journal ranking, and the pattern of authorship. Journal of Corporate Finance, 13(5), 1008–1026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DuBois, F. L., & Reeb, D. (2000). Ranking the international business journals. Journal of International Business Studies, 31(4), 689–704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feng, Y., & Chen, Y. F. (2011). Technical Note—A computational approach for optimal joint inventory-pricing control in an infinite-horizon periodic-review system. Operations Research, 59(5), 1297–1303.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Glanzel, W., & Moed, H. F. (2002). Journal impact measures in bibliometric research. Scientometrics, 53(2), 171–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goh, C. H., Holsapple, C. W., Johnson, L. E., & Tanner, J. (1996). An empirical assessment of influences on POM research. Omega, 24(3), 337–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goh, C. H., Holsapple, C. W., Johnson, L. E., & Tanner, J. R. (1997). Evaluating and classifying POM journals. Journal of Operations Management, 15(2), 123–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez-Pereira, B., Guerrero-Bote, V. P., & Moya-Anegón, F. (2010). A new approach to the metric of journals’ scientific prestige: The SJR indicator. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 379–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorman, M. F., & Kanet, J. J. (2005). Evaluating operations management-related journals via the author affiliation index. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 7(1), 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorman, M. F., & Kanet, J. J. (2007). Note—“OM Forum: Evaluating Operations Management-Related Journals via the Author Affiliation Index”—Do professors at top US business schools do what they say? Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 9(1), 51–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorraiz, J., Gumpenberger, C., Schloegl, C., & Wieland, M. (2012, September). On the temporal stability of Garfield’s impact factor and its suitability to identify hot papers. In: 17th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators (STI) (pp. 5–8).

  • Guerrero-Bote, V. P., & Moya-Anegón, F. (2012). A further step forward in measuring journals’ scientific prestige: The SJR2 indicator. Journal of Informetrics, 6(4), 674–688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harless, D., & Reilly, R. (1998). Revision of the journal list for doctoral designation, Unpublished report. Richmond, VA: Virginia Commonwealth University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harzing, A. (2007). Publish or Perish. Available from her website at http://www.harzing.com/pop.htm. Accessed 20 May 2013.

  • Leydesdorff, L. (2008). Caveats for the use of citation indicators in research and journal evaluations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(2), 278–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lim, A., Ma, H., Wen, Q., Xu, Z., & Cheang, B. (2009). Distinguishing citation quality for journal impact assessment. Communications of the ACM, 52(8), 111–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lim, A., Ma, H., Wen, Q., Xu, Z., Cheang, B., Tan, B., & Zhu, W. (2007). Journal-Ranking. com: an online interactive journal ranking system. In Proceeding of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (Vol. 22, No. 2, p. 1723). Menlo Park, CA; Cambridge, MA; London; AAAI Press; MIT Press; 1999.

  • Moed, H., Colledge, L., Reedijk, J., Moya-Anegon, F., Guerrero-Bote, V., Plume, A., et al. (2012). Citation-based metrics are appropriate tools in journal assessment provided that they are accurate and used in an informed way. Scientometrics, 92, 367–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, J. E. (2005). Top-25-business-school professors rate journals in operations management and related fields. Interfaces, 35(4), 323–338.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Page, L., Brin, S., Motwani, R., & Winograd, T. (1999). The PageRank citation ranking: bringing order to the web. Technical Report. Stanford InfoLab.

  • Palacios-Huerta, I., & Volij, O. (2004). The measurement of intellectual influence. Econometrica, 72(3), 963–977.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Pendlebury, D. A. (2009). The use and misuse of journal metrics and other citation indicators. Archivum immunologiae et therapiae experimentalis, 57(1), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinski, G., & Narin, F. (1976). Citation influence for journal aggregates of scientific publications: Theory, with application to the literature of physics. Information Processing and Management, 12(5), 297–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robey, D., & Markus, M. L. (1998). Beyond rigor and relevance: producing consumable research about information systems. Information Resources Management Journal, 11(1), 7–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, R. (2002). Journal evaluation: technical and practical issues. Library Trends, 50(3), 418–439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saladin, B. (1985). Operations management research: Where should we publish. Operations Management Review, 3(4), 3–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seglen, P. O. (1997). Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ British Medical Journal, 314(7079), 498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R. (2006). Commentary: The power of the unrelenting impact factor—Is it a force for good or harm? International Journal of Epidemiology, 35(5), 1129–1130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vokurka, R. J. (1996). The relative importance of journals used in operations management research a citation analysis. Journal of Operations Management, 14(4), 345–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weingart, P. (2005). Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: Inadvertent consequences? Scientometrics, 62(1), 117–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wen, Q. (2008). Journal Impact Assessment: Methodology and Experiments. PhD Thesis, Chapter 2. The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong).

  • West, J., Althouse, B., & Rosvall, M. (2008). Eigenfactor™ Score and Article Influence™ Score: Detailed Methods, Available at [http://www.eigenfactor.org/methods.pdf]. Accessed 25 Jan 2014.

  • Xu, Z., Cheang, B., Lim, A., & Wen, Q. (2011). Evaluating OR/MS journals via PageRank. Interfaces, 41(4), 375–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. International Center of Management Science and Engineering, School of Management and Engineering, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210093, China

    Brenda Cheang & Andrew Lim

  2. Division of Information and Technology Studies, Faculty of Education, University of Hong Kong, Runme Shaw Building, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, S.A.R., China

    Brenda Cheang & Samuel Kai Wah Chu

  3. Department of Management Sciences, College of Business, City University of Hong Kong, Tat Chee Ave, Kowloon, Hong Kong, S.A.R., China

    Chongshou Li

Authors
  1. Brenda Cheang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Samuel Kai Wah Chu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chongshou Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Andrew Lim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chongshou Li.

Additional information

Andrew Lim is currently on no pay leave from City University of Hong Kong.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 6, 7 and 8.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cheang, B., Chu, S.K.W., Li, C. et al. OR/MS journals evaluation based on a refined PageRank method: an updated and more comprehensive review. Scientometrics 100, 339–361 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1272-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1272-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation