A survey of The Journal of Business Communication for a 15-year period shows that many
Journal authors are affiliated with research universities and that a relatively small percentage
of Journal authors publish in the Journal more than once. It also shows that co-authorship
is increasingly common; that over time authors have chosen to cite a larger number of sources;
and that authors cite a variety of sources, particularly serials. Cited serials come most often
from the areas of business and economics, social sciences and education, and business
communication; the patterns of serial citation were relatively stable during the surveyed
period. The Journal is open to other business and communication serials, but somewhat closed
to serials outside those two areas. The serials cited most often by the Journal do not cite the
Journal in turn. On the other hand, some newer business communication serials cite the
Journal frequently.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allen, M.W., Gotcher, J.M., & Seibert, J.H. (1993). A decade of organizational communication research: Journal articles 1980-1991. In S. A. Deetz (Ed.), Communication yearbook 16 (pp. 252-330). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
2.
Beard, J.D., & Williams, D.L. (1993). A professional profile of business communication educators and their research preferences: Survey results. The Journal of Business Communication, 30, 269-295.
3.
Blackburn, R.T., Behymer, C.E., & Hall, D.E. (1978). Research note: Correlates of faculty publications . Sociology of Education, 51, 132-141.
4.
Borgman, C. L., & Paisley, W. (Eds.). (1989). Bibliometric methods for the study of scholarly communication [Special issue]. Communication Research, 16(5).
5.
Carnegie Council on Policy Studies in Higher Education. (1976). A classification of institutions of higher education (rev. ed.). Berkeley, CA: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
6.
Chaison, G.N. (1971). Changes in authorship, affiliation, and research support patterns of Journal of Applied Psychology articles, 1917-1969. Journal of Applied Psychology, 55, 484-486.
7.
Cole, J.R., & Cole, S. (1973). Social stratification in science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
8.
Daniel, C.A. (1983). Remembering our charter: Business communication at the crossroads. The Journal of Business Communication, 20(3), 3-11.
9.
DeWine, S., & Daniels, T. (1993). Beyond the snapshot: Setting a research agenda in organizational communication. In S. A. Deetz (Ed.), Communication yearbook 16 (pp. 331-346). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
10.
DuFrene, D.D., & Nelson, B.H. (1990). Effective co-authoring for business communication academicians. Bulletin of the Association for Business Communication , 53(2), 68-71.
11.
Ferber, M.A. (1986). Citations: Are they an objective measure of scholarly merit? Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 11, 381-389.
12.
Fulton, O. & Trow, M. (1974). Research activity in American higher education . Sociology of Education, 47, 29-73.
13.
Garfield, E. (1984a). How to use citation analysis for faculty evaluations, and when is it relevant? Part 1. In E. Garfield (Ed.), Essays of an information scientist: Vol. 6. 1983 (pp. 354-362). Philadelphia: ISI Press. (Reprinted from Current Contents, October 31, 1983, No. 44)
14.
Garfield, E. (1984b). How to use citation analysis for faculty evaluations, and when is it relevant? Part 2. In E. Garfield (Ed.), Essays of an information scientist: Vol. 6. 1983 (pp. 363-372). Philadelphia: ISI Press. (Reprinted from Current Contents, November 7, 1983, No. 45)
15.
Garfield, E. (1986a). Origins of Current Contents, ISI, and computer-aided information retrieval. How it began at the Welch Medical Library indexing project. In E. Garfield (Ed.), Essays of an information scientist: Vol. 8. 1985. Ghostwriting and other essays (pp. 320-326). Philadelphia: ISI Press. (Reprinted from Current Contents, August 26,1985, No. 34)
16.
Garfield, E. (1986b). Uses and misuses of citation frequency. In E. Garfield (Ed.), Essays of an information scientist: Vol. 8. 1985. Ghostwriting and other essays (pp. 403-409). Philadelphia: ISI Press. (Reprinted from Current Contents, October 28,1985, No. 43)
17.
Gilbert, G.N. (1977). Referencing as persuasion. Social Studies of Science, 7, 113-122.
18.
Gordon, M.D. (1980). A critical reassessment of inferred relations between multiple authorship, scientific collaboration, and the production of papers and their acceptance for publication. Scientometrics , 2, 193-201.
19.
Hagge, J. (1986, November). Business communication, the orphaned discipline: A historical review of business communication teachers' perceptions of their field's place in the college curriculum. In [ Douglas Andrews (Ed.)] Proceedings 51st ABC International Convention (pp. 168-177). Los Angeles.
20.
Hickson, M. III, Stacks, D.W., & Amsbary, J.H. (1989). An analysis of prolific scholarship in speech communication, 1915-1985: Toward a yardstick for measuring research productivity . Communication Education, 38, 230-236.
21.
Holub, H.W., Tappeiner, G., & Eberharter, V. (1991). The iron law of important articles. Southern Economic Journal, 58, 317-328.
22.
Isenberg, J.P., Jalongo, M.R., & Bromley, K.D. (1987). The role of collaboration in scholarly writing: A national study. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED 287-873).
23.
Koch, J.E. (1979). A citation analysis for business communication . The Journal of Business Communication, 16(4), 45-56.
24.
Kyle, D., & McCutcheon, G. (1984). Collaborative research: Development and issues. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 16, 173-179.
25.
Ladd, E.C., & Lipset, S.M. (1978). Final report: Survey of the social, political and educational perspectives of American college and university faculty. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut Press.
26.
Presser, S. (1980). Collaboration and the quality of research. Social Studies of Science, 10, 95-101.
27.
Reinsch, L. (1992). The state of the Journal in 1991: A report from the editor. The Journal of Business Communication, 29, 93-94.
28.
Rentz, K. (Ed.). (1993). Business communication as a discipline [Special issue]. The Journal of Business Communication, 30(3).
29.
Rodgers, R.C., & Maranto, C.L. (1989). Causal models of publishing productivity in psychology . Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 636-649.
30.
Samson, G.E., Graue, M.E., Weinstein, T., & Walberg, H.J. (1984). Academic and occupational performance: A quantitative synthesis. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 311-321.
31.
Schramm, R.M., & Wayne, F.S. (1992). Productivity rankings for institutions, departments, and individuals based on number of business communication articles in six journals. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 34(1), 1-12.
32.
Shapiro, F.R. (1992). Origins of bibliometrics, citation indexing, and citation analysis: The neglected legal literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43, 337-339.
33.
So, C.Y.K. (1988). Citation patterns of core communication journals: An assessment of the developmental status of communication. Human Communication Research, 15, 236-255.
34.
Stead, B.A. (1978). A content analysis of the Journal of Business Communication: Toward a body of knowledge. The Journal of Business Communication, 15(2), 45-51.
35.
Williams, W.W. (1987). Institutional propensities to publish in academic journals of business administration: 1979-1984. Quarterly Review of Economics and Business, 27(1), 77-94.
36.
Zarefsky, D. (1993, April). President's column: Does intellectual diversity always serve us well? Spectra, 29(4), 2-3.
