The Most Prolific Female Scholars in Elite Criminology and Criminal Justice Journals, 2000-2010

There has been a steady stream of research exploring the impact of scholars' research within criminology/criminal justice journals (CCJ), but only a small number of studies have examined the impact of female scholars in particular. Extending that line of work, the present study identifies the most productive sole and lead female authors published in eight top-ranked CCJ journals between 2000 and 2010. Findings reveal that individual ranks of the female scholars are relatively stable when adjusting for frequency and journal impact factor. However, there is more movement in the ranks when they are adjusted based on the year the PhD. degree was earned. Consistent with previous research including both males and females, a handful of female scholars, in particular Robin Engel, Beth Huebner, Jodi Lane, and Nicole Leeper Piquero appear to be responsible for a large portion of work in the selected eight elite CCJ journals.     

Article Productivity Among the Faculty of Criminology and Criminal Justice Doctoral Programs, 2010–2014

One important dimension of the quality of a graduate program is the quality of its faculty. Previous assessments of the publication productivity of criminology and criminal justice (CCJ) faculties have been needlessly incomplete and narrow, reflecting publications only in a small number of CCJ journals. Assessments covering only CCJ journals fail to reflect the multi-disciplinary nature of CCJ and bias results against programs whose most productive scholars publish in non-CCJ journals. The present research covers the full array of major journals in which CCJ-related research appears, by searching for articles using the Web of Science and ProQuest databases. This article is an update of two previous evaluations, covering 2000–2004 and 2005–2009. Based on article counts, the most productive faculties are those of Sam Houston State University, Florida State University and the University of Cincinnati. The article also summarizes changes in rankings of CCJ programs from 2000 through 2014.     

The Invisible Scholar: Authors of Legal Scholarship in Criminology and Criminal Justice Journals

This study assesses the authorship of legal scholarship within 20 criminology and criminal justice (CCJ) journals from 2005 to 2015, examining trends over time and variation across journals in the prevalence of sole-authorship and the mean number of authors and identifying the most prolific authors of legal scholarship published in CCJ journals. The study thus sheds light on the extent of collaboration among CCJ legal scholars and identifies CCJ legal scholars who have remained largely invisible due to their focus on a marginalized subfield.     

Persona Non Grata: The Marginalization of Legal Scholarship in Criminology and Criminal Justice Journals

Recently, concern has been voiced within the academy regarding the marginalization of legal scholarship within the criminology and criminal justice (CCJ) discipline. Although conventional wisdom and anecdotal evidence indicate that it is difficult to get legal scholarship published in CCJ journals, there is a dearth of empirical evidence on the representation of legal scholarship in CCJ journals. The present study assesses the representation of legal scholarship in 20 CCJ journals from 2005 to 2015, examining both trends over time and variation across journals. Findings indicate legal scholarship comprises a very small portion of articles published, there has been a steep decline in the number of legal articles published in recent years, and the average number of legal articles per year is very low for nearly all of the journals in the sample. The implications of the marginalization of legal scholarship within the CCJ discipline are discussed.     

PUBLICATION OUTLETS FOR SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY FACULTY: 2010 to 2015

Many school psychology faculty are required to publish for purposes of retention and promotion. It is useful to have an understanding of the different outlets for scholarly publications. In the present study, we investigated the peer‐reviewed journals in which school psychology faculty were published between 2010 and 2015, the number of articles in each journal, and the acceptance rates and impact estimates for each journal. We identified school psychology faculty using the National Association of School Psychologists website and conducted a search of the publications using EBSCO databases. Results indicated that there were a total of 3,675 articles and a total of 832 peer‐reviewed journals in which school psychology faculty were published during the 6‐year span. Among the peer‐reviewed journals, Psychology in the Schools, School Psychology Quarterly, School Psychology Review, and Journal of School Psychology were the journals in which school psychology faculty members most frequently published. Acceptance rates ranged from less than 5% to 98%, with an average of 29.7%. H‐indexes ranged from 1 to 890, with an average of 52. These results illustrate the variety of journals that publish works from school psychology faculty and the need for school psychology faculty and other authors to consider a variety of options when seeking publication.     

What Journals are the Most Cited Journals in Criminology and Criminal Justice’s “Big Three” Journals?

Recently, scholars have sought to learn more about scholarly activity within the fields of criminology and criminal justice (CCJ). Research in this area has examined which departments have the most productive faculty, which scholars are the most productive, and which journals are the most prestigious. However, no study of which we are aware has determined what journals criminologists are most likely to cite in their scholarly research. In this study, we rank the most influential journals by the number of times those journals were cited between 2009 and 2013 in Criminology, the Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, and Justice Quarterly. Our analyses suggest that Criminology is clearly the most influential CCJ journal in terms of citations, while the American Sociological Review, the Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, and the American Journal of Sociology remain influential in CCJ as well.     

Criminology and Criminal Justice Hit Parade: Measuring Academic Productivity in the Discipline

Previous research assessing the productivity of criminology and criminal justice (CCJ) scholars has sought to determine the overall most productive scholars based on various measures (e.g. total articles published, total cites, and articles per year). While such lists may be important for those who rank high, they may be best used to establish benchmarks for the discipline. To date, research examining the stars in CCJ has focused on overall stars. The aim of the current research is to highlight the most productive scholars (in CCJ doctoral programs), but to do so based on academic rank. As such, our sample is more inclusive than others that have assessed highly productive scholars in the field. By disaggregating productivity measures by academic ranks, it is possible to determine rising stars in the discipline as well as top stars overall. Additionally, and we think more importantly, such rankings give insights into the state of the discipline.     

CHARACTERISTICS OF INTERVENTION RESEARCH IN SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY JOURNALS: 2010–2014

The purpose of this study was to provide an updated content analysis of articles published in major journals of school psychology spanning the years 2010–2014, with an emphasis on intervention research (including intervention and participant characteristics). Six journals—School Psychology Review, School Psychology Quarterly, Journal of School Psychology, Psychology in the Schools, School Psychology International, and Journal of Applied School Psychology—were selected for the analysis. Over the 5‐year period, 1,196 articles were published in the selected journals. A total of 65.8% of the articles were empirical articles; intervention studies with school‐age samples comprised 11.1% of all articles. Within the intervention studies, single subject represented the most frequently used research design (40.6%). Further, 58.6% of the intervention studies did not provide sufficient information to discern participants’ disability status. Although the proportion of empirically based articles has increased in recent years, that of intervention articles has remained low.     

A Content Analysis of Ethnographic Research Published in Top Criminology and Criminal Justice Journals from 2000 to 2009

Despite qualitative research having much to offer to the understanding and prevention of crime, academic research in criminology and criminal justice (CCJ) is primarily quantitative. The relatively limited amount of ethnographic research in the field contributes to difficulties in understanding what represents sound ethnographic designs and the most appropriate ways to present such information. The current study examines the relative frequency with which ethnographic research appears in CCJ journals, and more importantly, the content of these articles. We find that less than 4% of all research published in 15 top CCJ journals use ethnographic methods. We present patterns about the methodological (e.g., sample size, type of data collection, and characteristics of participants) and stylistic (writing style, discussion of coding, and policy recommendations) content of these articles. We conclude with implications for our findings and point to substantive areas of research that may need more attention.     

Pedagogy in Counselor Education: 2011–2015 Update

This research update includes a quantitative content analysis of 133 peer‐reviewed articles regarding teaching and learning published in 21 journals of the American Counseling Association and its divisions between January 2011 and December 2015. The authors discuss the focus areas, pedagogical foundations, and methodologies of the articles in comparison with the findings of the original 2001–2010 study.     

Gender Composition of Editors and Editorial Boards in Seven Top Criminal Justice and Criminology Journals from 1985 to 2017

This paper examines the gender composition of editors and editorial board members of seven top criminal justice and criminology (CCJ) journals from 1985 through 2017. The findings indicate that women have historically been, and continue to be, underrepresented in these positions. From 1985 through 2017, women comprised 14% of all Editors-in-Chief, 27% of all Associate Editors, and 22% of all Editorial Board members. While there was a period during the early 2000s when Justice Quarterly and Criminology achieved gender parity in representation across all of the editorial roles, this equality was short lived. The other journals have never achieved gender parity, and, on average, women have comprised 3.8% to 35.2% of the editorial positions at each of the journals. The implications of this imbalance for women’s scholarship and professional success are discussed, and recommendations for changes to CCJ journal policies and practices to ensure more equity are provided.     

Predatory Journals in the Criminal Justices Sciences: Getting our Cite on the Target

The advent of Open-Access publishing has opened the door to predatory journals. While many Open-Access publishers are trustworthy, not all of them are guided by legitimate or altruistic motives. When publishers become beholden to authors, rather than readers, the incentive and motivation to uphold and preserve integrity in research and scholarship is eroded. All disciplines would benefit from institutional and peer reviews of open-access journals listed as potentially, possibly, or probably predatory, and from a list of institutionally sanctioned acceptable-journals, prior to submitting their work for publication. At present, these protections do not seem to exist. Criminology/Criminal Justice researchers are being solicited by, and are published in predatory journals, which hold little scholarly value or credibility, resulting in serious negative ramifications for tenure and promotion. This exploratory study utilizes two surveys to assess knowledge and perceptions of predatory journals among criminal justice and criminology authors who have published in a predatory journal, and ACJS and ASC members.     

An alternate look at educational psychologist’s productivity from 1991 to 2002

Previous investigations of the productivity of educational psychologists (Smith et al., 1998, Smith et al., 2003) have used a points system that defines high productivity as having few co-authors and high authorship placement. Due to the increasingly collaborative nature of educational psychology research (Robinson, McKay, Katayama, & Fan, 1998), defining productivity in this way may not fully capture the essence of our work nor provide the most useful information for potential graduate students. In taking a closer look at the most-published persons in educational psychology journals from 1991 to 2002, we found that most also published even more articles in other journals and regularly included co-authors, especially graduate students. Some persons, who have not been recognized as being the most productive in the Smith et al. lists, published considerably more articles than others who have appeared in those lists.     

Including fathers in school psychology literature: A review of four school psychology journals

It is well documented that fathers have a significant influence on their children's success in school. To examine the ways in which fathers have been represented in school psychology literature, the authors searched over 1,000 recent articles published in four leading U.S. school psychology journals (Psychology in the Schools, School Psychology Review, School Psychology Quarterly, and the Journal of School Psychology) for content on fathers. Fathers were included substantially in nine articles and were the primary focus of only one other article. Reasons for the lack of information on fathers and suggestions for increasing the focus on fathers in school psychology literature are discussed. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Psychol Schs 41: 575–580, 2004.     

Qualitative Research in Distance Education: An Analysis of Journal Literature 2005–2012

This review study examines the current research literature in distance education for the years 2005 to 2012. The author found 382 research articles published during that time in four prominent peer-reviewed research journals. The articles were classified and coded as quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods. Further analysis found another category of articles in which qualitative data were obtained but results were reported as quantitative. The analysis shows that the publication of purely qualitative research occurs least often in The American Journal of Distance Education than in the other journals. The analysis also shows that, on average, prominent journals are publishing less qualitative research now than they were 2005. This study shows the need for further research and analysis of the methodologies currently utilized in distance education.     

The Current State of Criminological Research in the United States: An Examination of Research Methodologies in Criminology and Criminal Justice Journals

A recurring concern within criminology and criminal justice (CCJ) is how to best investigate criminological theory and criminal justice policy. To assess the current state of research, we conducted a content analysis of articles that appeared in seven CCJ journals over a two-year period (2013–2014). We then examined types and frequencies of data sources, analytic techniques, methodological approaches, and subject matters. Findings demonstrate that articles are predominantly employing quantitative methodologies and data where there is no participant contact. From these findings, we discuss the current state of research and how this could be used to guide graduate education, by recommending a variety of subject matters that graduate schools should emphasize in training new academics.     

Measuring Journal Prestige in Criminal Justice and Criminology

Recent years have seen an increased reliance on the Thomson Reuters Journal Impact Factor (JIF) as a method of evaluating the prestige of academic journals. While the JIF has existed for many years, the increased use of technology to track publications and citations has resulted in other methods of measuring prestige, including Google Scholar’s H-index and Elsevier’s Cite Score. It is unclear, however, whether these “objective” methods of evaluation are correlated with the journals’ reputations among scholars. This paper compares objective and subjective evaluations of journals in criminal justice and criminology among a sample of ASC and ACJS members. Our findings indicate that subjective evaluations of experts are more strongly correlated with Google’s H-Index and Elsevier’s Cite Score than with impact factors. We conclude that for criminal justice and criminology scholars, Thomson Reuters’ JIF may not be the best measure of quality.