A multi-method evaluation of journals in the decision and management sciences by US academics

Numerous studies published in the academic literature address the issue of journal quality. However, little has been done to evaluate the broad set of journals pertinent to academic research in the decision and management sciences. This study examines the quality of such journals from a US point of view using both survey- and citation-based measures of journal quality. The survey-based measure is the perceived quality ratings assigned by US academics in the management science field. The citation-based measure is the impact factor, an indication of how often the articles in a journal are cited. This study finds that perceived quality ratings of the journals are positively correlated with citation impact factors. Also, both of these quality measures are found to be positively correlated with journal circulation and negatively correlated with acceptance rate. Journal quality ratings appear to vary across reviewers with different research interest areas and reviewers seem to rate journals higher if they have published in them.