h-Index and m-Quotient Benchmarks of Scholarly Impact in Criminology and Criminal Justice: A Preliminary Note

Because Scopus and metrics like the h-index and m-quotient have become increasingly popular for assessing the impact of social science scholarship, criminology and criminal justice (CCJ) departments may be tempted to use those metrics when making important decisions like tenure and promotion. However, since no discipline-wide standards based on those metrics yet exist, CCJ departments have no comparative basis for interpreting the results of citation analyses of a particular faculty member’s scholarship. To identify what a set of disciplinary standards might look like, we used Scopus and calculated mean and median h-index and m-quotient values for faculty members (n?=?504) in CCJ Ph.D. granting departments (n?=?35) by rank and for editorial board members (n?=?91) of Criminology, Justice Quarterly, and the Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. Our results illustrate how comparative disciplinary standards could be developed and used by those in CCJ departments to assess the impact of faculty members’ scholarship.     

Scholarly Productivity of Editorial Board Members of Three American Counseling and Counseling Psychology Journals

The scholarly journals in professional and scientific fields serve the function of communicating new knowledge and informed discourse on the major issues affecting the field of counseling, and editorial board members (EBMs) serve as gatekeepers of what information will be communicated. The ability of EBMs to make sound judgments directly affects the quality of research and scholarship published. This study analyzed one important EBM qualification, the scholarly productivity of the editorial board members of three major American counseling journals (The Counseling Psychologist [TCP], the Journal of Counseling Psychology [JCP], and the Journal of Counseling and Development [JCD]). An analysis of the productivity rates of editorial board members on these journals was conducted using the PsycINFO database. The results indicated that editorial board members of JCP have significantly more experience publishing than members of TCP and JCD. The differential publication rates of editorial board members suggest that these three journals place different emphasis on scholarly productivity as part of their selection criteria for editorial board membership and may reflect that the three journals have different missions and serve different clientele. These findings have implications, not only for the profession of counseling in the United States, but also for the international counseling community.This article is dedicated to our esteemed colleague, Stephen G. Weinrach, who died after a long and courageous battle with leukemia on April 24, 2004. This article was the last that Steve was working on prior to his death. It was his brainchild. The contributions that Steve made to the counseling profession over the years are inestimable. He was truly through his numerous writings and professional association activities the “conscience of the couseling profession.” He is dearly missed.     

Publication Productivity of Criminologists

This article investigates the number of publications of thousands of members of the American Society of Criminology (ASC) in hundreds of journals listed in the Criminal Justice Periodical Index (CJPI). Publications in 2004–2005 of ASC members in 2005, and publications in 2010–2011 of ASC members in 2011, were investigated. Only ASC members who were considered to be “at risk” of publishing in Criminology and Criminal Justice (CCJ) journals were included. About one-third of ASC members published at least one CJPI article in 2004–2005, but this increased to one-half by 2010–2011. The number of articles published per year by those who published any articles also increased, from 1.0 in 2004–2005 to 1.4 in 2010–2011. The number of articles published in the 26 most central CCJ journals also increased, by about 75%. The most-published scholars in the first time period were Alex R. Piquero, Brian K. Payne, Francis T. Cullen, David W. Webb, and Julian V. Roberts; the most-published scholars in the second time period were Alex R. Piquero, Kevin M. Beaver, Wesley G. Jennings, George E. Higgins, and Matthew J. Delisi. Alex R. Piquero was the most prolific publisher on all measures in both time periods. Female scholars were more likely to appear among the most-published scholars in the second time period.     

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.     

Women’s Involvement in Educational Psychology Journals from 1976 to 2004

Previously, Robinson, McKay, Katayama, and Fan (1998) examined women’s involvement in six educational psychology journals (American Educational Research Journal, Contemporary Educational Psychology, Educational Psychologist, Educational Psychology Review, Journal of Experimental Education, and Journal of Educational Psychology) from 1976 to 1996 and found that although women made gains as authors and editorial board members, they remained underrepresented as editors. In this Reflections on the Field article, we compare the Robinson et al. data with our more recent data. We found that from 1996 to 2004, the percentage of women members in education and psychology organizations has risen. Meanwhile, the percentage of women authors has remained stable; the percentage of women editorial board members has risen slightly; and the percentage of women editors has risen dramatically. We also found that the percentage of women authors and editorial board members lags slightly behind what would be expected based on organizational membership percentages for women. On the other hand, there are now more female editors than would be expected.     

Examining scholarship in China’s academe: an exploratory study

We selected five Chinese university-based journals and five Western university-based journals to examine the extent of contributions by editorial board members and faculty from the universities in which the journals are published over a 6-year period from 2001 to 2006. A disproportionate contribution of faculty papers was from editorial board members in the Chinese university-based journals and faculty in the universities the journals are affiliated to. We speculate that this could be attributed to various reasons, including issues of protectionism, academic accountability, and the social capital of guanxi in the specific context of China. We suggest that editorial review boards of university-based journals in China may need to re-examine professional roles, responsibilities and ethics that may require new thinking on scholarship in higher education.     

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.     

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.     

Developing a System for Describing Teaching

If only 49.9% of the women's Division I college athletic teams are coached by women (Acosta &; Carpenter, 1985a), then based on extrapolation it seems that women hold about 25% of all Division I coaching positions. Although a few researchers have investigated the reasons for this skewed gender ratio, they have used the individual model that assumes the worker shapes the workplace. In contrast, this author attempts to explain male domination of the profession using an organizational model based on the assumption that the structure of the workplace shapes the worker. This model is the basis for Kanter's (1977) theory in which she identifies three structural determinants of the workplace that shape gender differentiated work behavior. This author explores the shape of these determinants—opportunity, power, and proportion in the coaching profession—to determine how they may affect the number of females who enter and leave the coaching profession. The discussion of each determinant is accompanied by suggestions for restructuring the workplace to make the climate more favorable for women coaches.     

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.     

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.     

Are Women Underrepresented as Authors and Editors of Educational Psychology Journals?

To determine the progress women have made in the last 20 years in terms of contributions to the knowledge base (i.e., authorship) and reputations as leading contributors (i.e., appointments as editors and editorial board members) in educational psychology, we analyzed data from six journals: theAmerican Educational Research Journal, Contemporary Educational Psychology,theEducational Psychologist, Educational Psychology Review,theJournal of Experimental Education,and theJournal of Educational Psychology.Results indicated that (a) women's progress in terms of authorships could be predicted by their increasing representation as educational psychologists, (b) opportunities for females to become editorial board members seem to be getting better, and (c) opportunities for females to become editors seem to be getting worse.     

新形势下高校学报编辑部管理模式转变的探讨

针对当前高校学报编辑部管理面临的一些困境与问题进行了探讨,并提出了一种可解决问题的新型管理模式,将责权利在主编、编委、编辑之间进行有效分配,以求达到有效管理,提高稿件质量,提升学报水平的目的。以期此管理模式能为高校学报同行提供理论参考。     

Trends in Female Authorships, Editorial Board Memberships, and Editorships in Educational Psychology Journals from 2003 to 2008

Robinson, McKay, Katayama, and Fan (Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23, 331–343, 1998) reported that women were underrepresented in terms of authorships, editorial board memberships, and editorships in the field of educational psychology based on membership trends. More recently, Evans, Hsieh, and Robinson (Educational Psychology Review, 17, 263–271, 2005) reported that women had made gains as editors but had not kept pace with organizational membership in terms of authorships and editorial board memberships. Our goal in this paper was to further examine women’s participation in educational psychology journals by extending the datasets of Robinson et al. and Evans et al. The number of female authors per article, particularly those from non-US institutions, has continued to increase. However, consistent with Evans et al., although females are continuing to make numerical gains in both authorships—both primary and secondary—and editorial board memberships, their involvement has not kept pace in relation to membership trends.     

Perceptions of the Trend of Collaborative Publications: Results from a Survey of Criminal Justice and Criminology Department Chairs

Department heads are unique academic positions which can bridge the worlds of faculty and administration. As such, they are sometimes in the unique position where their perceptions and experiences can have real-world impact in the realm of assessing a colleague’s work, tweaking departmental policies of promotion and advancement, and mentoring. While faculty members of all levels have opinions of collaboration, department heads are the leaders who can actually act upon those perceptions, yet these perceptions have not been examined. This study addresses this gap in a survey of Criminal Justice and Criminology department heads (n?=?73). The survey varied authorship order, journal prestige, medium of journal, and also examined co-author prestige. In addition, 12 years of 20 criminal justice journals were coded for solo-authored publications. Results demonstrated differential publication trends between top tier and lower tiered journals, and that department heads attributed these trends as a combination of increasing social research networks and more pragmatic concerns. Of particular interest, is the differential value respondents placed on solo-authored work and collaborative work even when taking into consideration prestige of the journal.     

Theorizing progress: Women in science,engineering, and technology in higher education

A conceptual framework of positions on women in science, engineering, and technology (SET) was developed, showing a chronological progression of the main approaches to women's underrepresentation in SET during the past 20 years. Numerous initiatives have been advocated to address women's underrepresentation in SET in higher education. This article arose out of one such initiative, Winning Women, which was intended to help higher education in Scotland move toward good practice in this field. Two members of the project team describe their key findings and experiences. They illustrate how the underrepresentation of women in SET continues to be both progressive and persistent (using an SET parity index). The conceptual framework was conceived and developed from a metaanalysis of feminist theories of the gendered politics of science and technology. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 36: 637–661, 1999     

The scholarship of teaching and learning: A Special Niche for Faculty at Comprehensive Universities?

We investigated the involvement of faculty members at comprehensive universities in scholarship of teaching and learning publishing activities in four disciplines. Compared to to their publishing rates in research-oriented journals, comprehensive university faculty members were more involved in publishing articles and serving on editorial boards for pedagogical journals. Over the past three decades, the relative involvement in the scholarship of teaching and learning journals by faculty members at comprehensive universities and liberal arts colleges has increased whereas participation by faculty members at research universities has declined.     

Women academic leaders in a Latin American university: Reconciling the paradoxes of professional lives

This study used interviews with 18 women in positions of academic leadership at the University of Costa Rica to explore such questions as (1) why do women seem to have success attaining positions? (2) how did these women get to their current positions? (3) what obstacles did they meet along the way and what facilitated their journey? (4) what is the relationship of machmismo and institutional culture to women's professional choices and lives? A secondary purpose of the study was to provide insight into the lives of professional Latin American women, about which little is known. Traditional Western theories used to explain women's careers lead to the conclusion that Costa Rican women are oppressed and discriminated against in their quest for academic careers. An intepretivist framework focusing on the meaning women give to their lives suggests a different conclusion. Comparing themselves to women in the larger society, academic women described themselves as leading privileged lives in which rules are gender blind and women can achieve through hard work and dedication.     

Colonial legacy, women’s rights and gender-educational inequality in the Arab World with particular reference to Egypt and Tunisia

One aspect of the call for democracy in the recent Arab region uprisings is the issue of women’s rights and gender equality. Three cultural and ideological forces have continued to shape the gender discourse in Arab Muslim-majority societies. They are: “Islamic” teaching and local traditions concerning women’s roles in a given society; Western, European colonial perception of women’s rights; and finally national gender-related policy reforms. This paper examines the past and present status of women and gender-educational inequality in the Arab world with particular reference to Egypt and Tunisia, prior to and post colonialism. Special attention is given to colonial legacy and its influence on gender and education; to current gender practices in the social sphere with a focus on women’s modesty (hijab); to international policies and national responses with regard to women’s rights and finally to female participation in pre-university and higher education. These issues incorporate a discussion of cultural and religious constraints. The paper demonstrates similarities and differences between Egypt’s and Tunisia’s reform policies towards gender parity. It highlights the confrontation of conservative versus liberal ideologies that occurred in each country with the implementation of its gender-related reform policy.