The Oppenheim effect in scholarly journal publishing
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/14684520710780386 |
| Pages | 417-419 |
| Date | 14 August 2007 |
| Published date | 14 August 2007 |
| Author | G.E. Gorman |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Library & information science |
EDITORIAL
The Oppenheim effect in
scholarly journal publishing
G.E. Gorman
School of Information Management, Victoria University of Wellington,
Wellington, New Zealand
Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to look at the Oppenheim effect in scholarly journal publishing.
Design/methodology/approach – Discusses the quality control of refereed scholarly journals.
Findings – A key finding of this research was that editors perceived originality to be the most
important factor in their assessment of manuscripts.
Originality/value – Provides a discussion on the quality control of scholarly journals.
Keywords Serials, Qualitycontrol, Publishing
Paper type General review
The June 2007 issue of the Journal of Management Studies contains yet another attack
on the quality control of refereed scholarly journals. This was read by this editor with
considerable interest, as it is an area of importance not only for those who write and
publish in scholarly journals, but also the editors and publishers of these journals. My
initial reaction, as an editor with more than 25 years’ experience, was very much that of
Foghorn Leghorn, the rooster of Looney Tunes fame: “You’re way off, I say way off,
this time son!” (The Foghorn Leghorn Fan Club, n.d.) Why this reaction?
In their paper Macdonald and Kam (2007) claim to examine “...the gamesmanship
of publishing in quality journals”. Their examination is based on a survey of heads of
departments of management studies in British universities, and from this they
conclude that “... such gamesmanship is common. Cunning and calculation now
support scholarship in management studies”. They further maintain that this situation
will continue “... until the rewards for publishing attach to the content of papers, to
what is published rather than where it is published”.
Why are they “way off”? First of all, to make the assumption that there is no
correlation between the “what” and “where” of a publication seems naı
¨ve in the
extreme. Indeed, “where it is published” has long been a guide to the quality of “what is
published” in the world of scholarly journals – in much the same way that an Oxford
University Press title is more likely to be of substance than something published by an
unknown university press. An author published in an ISI-listed journal, for example, is
able to show that his writing has a recognised “stamp of approval”. Furthermore,
appearance in an ISI-listed journal almost by default means that that paper is more
likely to be highly cited than a paper of equivalent quality published elsewhere.
Why is this unlikely to change? As more countries adopt an RAE-equivalent for
their academic sectors – as is happening in Australia, New Zealand and elsewhere –
the old adage, “they can’t read, but they sure can count”, has taken on new life in
assessing academic achievement. Having recently sat on a panel charged with
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1468-4527.htm
The Oppenheim
effect
417
Online Information Review
Vol. 31 No. 4, 2007
pp. 417-419
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
1468-4527
DOI 10.1108/14684520710780386
To continue reading
Request your trial