• Suvapun Bunniran, Erin R Holmes, William B Lobb, and David J McCaffrey.
• School of Pharmacy, University of Mississippi, Faser Hall 236, University, MS 38677, USA.
• Res Social Adm Pharm. 2008 Jun 1; 4 (2): 125-43.

BackgroundIt has been over a decade since a journal quality rating study has been conducted in the social and administrative sciences (SAdS). This study sought to reevaluate perceptions of journal quality.ObjectivesTo develop a list of journals that are suitable publication venues for SAdS scholars and compare the quality of these journals as rated by school of pharmacy deans, SAdS department/division chairs, and SAdS faculty.MethodsA list of journals was assembled and presented to a Delphi panel of 15 SAdS scholars. Using a modified Delphi technique, the panel refined the list by judging the suitability of each journal as a publication venue for scholars. This list was used in a survey administered via the Internet. Journal quality was rated on a 7-point Likert-type scale with the option of indicating unfamiliarity with each journal. Differences in quality ratings between faculty, chairs, and deans were explored. Adjusted rating scores were calculated based on familiarity with journals. Ratings from the current study were compared to previous studies.ResultsOne hundred and twelve journals emerged from the modified Delphi technique. Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance found no significant difference in perceived journal quality across all journals evaluated by the 3 groups (KW=3.91). Groups did differ in their familiarity (KW=11.71, P<.01), with faculty being the most familiar with the journals and deans being the least familiar. Journal rankings were highly correlated with journal rankings from previously published studies.ConclusionsResults of this study have implications for scholars choosing publication venues and those who make decisions contingent on scholars' publication records. These differences may represent a positive or negative bias that affects hiring as well as tenure and promotion decisions. This study provides guidance for decisions reliant on publication records, but should not be used exclusively as such an indicator.

7 keywords...

hide…