The paper has considerably benefited from extensive comments of three anonymous referees which have substantially improved the paper. I am also grateful to Tim Worrall for information regarding the construction of the Keele list. Of course, any responsibility for the views expressed in the article rests solely with the author.
Article first published online: 2 SEP 2013
© 2013 The Author(s). The Economic Journal © 2013 Royal Economic Society
The Economic Journal
Volume 123, Issue 570, pages F202–F222, August 2013
How to Cite
Hudson, J. (2013), Ranking Journals. The Economic Journal, 123: F202–F222. doi: 10.1111/ecoj.12064
- Issue published online: 2 SEP 2013
- Article first published online: 2 SEP 2013
- Accepted manuscript online: 1 JUL 2013 08:32AM EST
- Manuscript Accepted: 1 APR 2013
- Manuscript Received: 30 APR 2012
We analyse the Keele list of economics journals, two lists produced in Australia and the Association of Business School (ABS) list. Econometric analysis suggests that all the rankings respond to combinations of bibliometrics, such as ISI's Article Influence and reward older journals. Lists produced by economists tend to reward theoretical journals and a focus on economics, whilst the ABS ranking tends to penalise an economics focus. On the basis of the regressions, we produce predicted rankings, distinguishing between journals which can be assigned to a specific category, for example 4*, and others which could lie in one of two categories.