Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T22:35:05.793Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Political Science Journals in Comparative Perspective: Evaluating Scholarly Journals in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 September 2009

James C. Garand
Affiliation:
Louisiana State University
Micheal W. Giles
Affiliation:
Emory University
André Blais
Affiliation:
Université de Montréal
Iain McLean
Affiliation:
Nuffield College, Oxford University

Abstract

In this article we report the results from a new survey of political scientists regarding their evaluations of journals in the political science discipline. Unlike previous research that has focused on data from the United States, we conducted an Internet survey of political scientists in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. We present data on journal evaluations, journal familiarity, and journal impact, both for our entire sample (N = 1,695) and separately for respondents from each of the three countries. We document the overall hierarchy of scholarly journals among political scientists, though we find important similarities and differences in how political scientists from these three countries evaluate the scholarly journals in the discipline. Our results suggest that there is a strong basis for cross-national integration in scholarly journal communication, though methodological differences among the three countries may be an impediment.

Type
The Profession
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Blais, Andre, McLean, Iain, Garand, James C., and Giles, Micheal W.. 2008. “The Methodological Divide in Political Science.” Paper presented at the 2008 annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association, Vancouver, British Columbia, June 4–6.Google Scholar
Christenson, James, and Sigelman, Lee. 1985. “Accrediting Knowledge: Journal Stature and Citation Impact in Social Science.” Social Science Quarterly 66: 964–75.Google Scholar
Crewe, Ivor, and Norris, Pippa. 1991. “British and American Journal Evaluation: Divergence or Convergence.” PS: Political Science and Politics 24: 524–30.Google Scholar
Garand, James C. 1990. “An Alternative Interpretation of Recent Political Science Journal Evaluations.” PS: Political Science and Politics 23: 448–51.Google Scholar
Garand, James C. 2005. “Integration and Fragmentation in Political Science: Exploring Patterns of Scholarly Communication in a Divided Discipline.” Journal of Politics 67: 9791005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garand, James C., and Giles, Micheal W.. 2003. “Journals in the Discipline: A Report on a New Survey of American Political Scientists.” PS: Political Science and Politics 36: 293308.Google Scholar
Giles, Micheal, Mizell, Francie, and Paterson, David. 1989. “Political Scientists' Journal Evaluations Revisited.” PS: Political Science and Politics 22: 613–17.Google Scholar
Giles, Micheal, and Wright, Gerald. 1975. “Political Scientists' Evaluations of Sixty-Three Journals.” PS: Political Science and Politics 8: 254–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giles, Micheal, and Garand, James C.. 2007. “Ranking Political Science Journals: Reputational and Citational Approaches.” PS: Political Science and Politics 40: 741–51.Google Scholar
Goodson, Larry, Dillman, Bradford, and Hira, Anil. 1999. “Ranking the Presses: Political Scientists' Evaluations of Publisher Quality.” PS: Political Science and Politics 32: 257–62.Google Scholar
Hix, Simon. 2004. “A Global Ranking of Political Science Departments.” Political Studies Review 2: 293313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Rogers. 2002. “Should We Make Political Science More of a Science or More About Politics?PS: Political Science and Politics 35: 199201.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Garand Supplementary Material

Appendix.pdf

Download Garand Supplementary Material(PDF)
PDF 137.2 KB