Periodical usefulness: an international perspective

Gibson, Brian; Hanna, Joe B.; Menachof, David

doi:10.1080/13675560412331298482

Cited by 26 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Using this approach, the authors concluded that Journal of Business Logistics, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, and The International Journal of Logistics Management were the top three journals. This approach yielded similar results from other non-citation-based analyses of journal quality, with the top three journals being the same in both approaches (Menachof et al, 2009;Gibson et al, 2004), thus affirming the robustness of the technique. Citation analysis has also been used in non-logistics, but SCM-related disciplines.…”

Section: Literature Reviewsupporting

confidence: 66%

“…It was determined that those scholars who published at least one research paper in one of the three journals, Journal of Business Logistics, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, or International Journal of Logistics Management, in the five-year period between 2007 and 2011 would form an appropriate research sample. The choice of journals was made based on the fact that these are generally recognized as being among the top few journals for logistics researchers (Kumar and Kwon, 2004;Gibson et al, 2004). This set of journals has been used previously for scholarly investigation of logistics research (Kovacs and Spens, 2005;Spens and Kovacs, 2006;Halldorsson and Arlbjorn, 2005).…”

Section: Research Methods Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On the measurement and benchmarking of research impact among active logistics scholars

Rao

Iyengar

Goldsby

2013

International Journal of Physical Distribution &Amp; Logistics Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:368933 [] For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services. AbstractPurpose -Scholarly interest in carrying out impactful research continues to remain high. Yet, given that citations of scholarly work can never decrease with time, traditional measures of research impact (such as raw counts of citations) unwittingly discriminate against early career researchers and also make it hard to identify future high impact scholars. In the current study, the paper compares several commonly used measures of research impact to identify one that best normalizes for the effect of career stage. The measure thus applies equally across most career stages, providing a usable impact benchmark for logistics scholars irrespective of seniority level. The paper also aims to present benchmarks on that metric to help logistics scholars identify their research impact vis-à -vis their peers. Design/methodology/approach -Bibliometric data on the research of 702 logistics scholars were collected and analyzed by dividing the scholars into different cohorts based on seniority. Comparisons of different citation metrics were then made. Findings -The h-rate provides the most appropriate basis for comparing research impact across logistics scholars of various career stages. Benchmark h-rates are provided for scholars to identify their research impact. Originality/value -The authors are unaware of any other work in the logistics field that measures the research impact of logistics scholars in this manner.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewsupporting

confidence: 66%

Section: Research Methods Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the measurement and benchmarking of research impact among active logistics scholars

Rao

Iyengar

Goldsby

2013

International Journal of Physical Distribution &Amp; Logistics Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Second, as similar assessments in other fields have based their analyses on the discipline's flagship journals (Collier and Bienstock 2007) and because Werner, Praxedes, and Kim (2007) found that the journal tier is a significant predictor for the reporting of nonresponse-higher-ranked journals address nonresponse bias more often-our aim was to focus on prestigious journals in the logistics research community. Thus, we based our choice on evaluations which focus on the academic prestige, readership and impact of logistics journals (Emmelhainz and Stock 1989;Fawcett, Vellenga, and Truitt 1995;Gibson and Hanna 2003;Gibson, Hanna, and Menachof 2004;Kumar and Kwon 2004;Menachof et al 2009). Of course, journal rankings might be viewed ambiguously within the research community.…”

Section: Samplingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Handling Nonresponse in Logistics Research

Wagner¹,

Kemmerling

2010

J of Business Logistics

237

176

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Assessing and controlling for nonresponse bias is critical for the validity and reliability of survey‐based logistics research. In order to gain a better understanding of how researchers assess and report nonresponse bias in their studies, we analyzed articles published from 1998 through 2007 in three top logistics journals (International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, Journal of Business Logistics, Transportation Journal). We describe and explore how nonresponse has been handled in these articles. Our findings show that first, survey response rates have declined over time; this influences the generalizability of survey results in case of nonresponse. Second, an average of 44% of published mail survey articles does not mention tests for detecting nonresponse bias.

show abstract

“…As a last step to ensure the fullest representation of research conducted by logistics academe, a manual search was conducted of what are recognized as the top traditional academic journals listed in Table II that were available electronically. The journals were selected based upon their potential to represent logistics academia's involvement in educational concerns (c.f., Gibson et al, 2004;Gibson and Hanna, 2003). General purpose educational journals were not manually searched since the purpose of this research effort was to evaluate the status of the logistics literature; however, these journals were not excluded from the earlier searches that netted most of the sample 4 .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An analysis of logistics pedagogical literature

Gravier

Farris

2008

The International Journal of Logistics Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose-There presently is no comprehensive review which systematizes and summarizes the burgeoning body of logistics educational literature. The purpose of this paper is to provide a guide for both educators and practitioners to assess the history, current status, and future trends in logistics education in order to nurture advancement in logistics education. Design/methodology/approach-This paper draws its conclusions based upon a literature review and categorizes the evolution of logistics education into three areas: defining curriculum, developing content and skills taught, and refining teaching methods. Findings-Logistics education continues to benefit from strong ties to industry. Additionally, four principle macro-environmental factors were discovered that impact the current status of logistics education: an increase in the number of logistics educational programs, limited supply of logistics-trained faculty, changes to content requirements, and a changing teaching environment. Future research directions from the published literature are summarized. Research limitations/implications-As current logistics programs continue to evolve and the number of logistics and supply chain management programs continue to increase in response to industry demand, this comprehensive review of the logistics literature may help serve as a benchmark for past and current practices in logistics education. Practical implications-The early partnership between industry and education set the stage to help guide educators to evolve logistics education to address practitioner needs. Increased interest in logistics education and changing environmental factors suggest the need for continued collaboration to further logistics education. Originality/value-The literature demonstrates successful dynamic behavior in response to dynamic industries. It highlights factors which may drive further evolution of logistics education and proposes areas impacted.

show abstract

Periodical usefulness: an international perspective

Cited by 26 publications

References 12 publications

On the measurement and benchmarking of research impact among active logistics scholars

On the measurement and benchmarking of research impact among active logistics scholars

Handling Nonresponse in Logistics Research

An analysis of logistics pedagogical literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About