Directory UMM :Data Elmu:jurnal:J-a:Journal Of Business Research:Vol49.Issue3.2000:

Research Productivity in the Journal
of Business Research: 1985–1999
Gary A. Knight
FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY

G. Tomas M. Hult
FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY

R. Edward Bashaw
UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT LITTLE ROCK

This article presents a thorough analysis of the research published in the
Journal of Business Research (JBR) during the period of 1985–1999.
First, each article published in JBR was categorized into a primary content
area according to the broad subject areas covered by the journal’s editorial
review boards. Marketing represents the largest area with 33% of the
articles, followed by buyer behavior (18%) and international business
(16%). Second, the contributing authors during the period of 1985–1999
were ranked according to the number of articles they had published in
the journal. William R. Darden was the most published author with 9
articles, whereas Cynthia Webster was ranked first when adjusting for

coauthorship. A similar analysis was conducted at the institutional level,
with Louisiana State University being the top publisher with 27 articles.
Additionally, we examined the impact of the published JBR articles in the
top 12 journals corresponding to the JBR content areas. In this analysis,
we found that JBR articles are heavily referenced in JBR, Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science (JAMS), Journal of Marketing (JM),
Journal of Retailing (JR), Journal of Marketing Research (JMR), Journal
of International Business Studies (JIBS), and Journal of International
Marketing (JIM). Individually, the JBR contributions by Robert E. Spekman and Shelby D. Hunt have had the most impact in the 12 journals
used in the citation analysis. On the article level, the contribution by Emin
Babakus and Gregory W. Boller titled “An Empirical Assessment of the
SERVQUAL Scale” (published in 1992) has been the most frequently referenced article, having been cited 16 times since its publication. J BUSN RES
2000. 49.303–314.  2000 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.

Address correspondence to G. Tomas M. Hult, Director of International Business and Associate Professor of Marketing & International Business, Florida
State University, College of Business, Tallahassee, FL 32306-1110, USA. E-mail:
thult@cob.fsu.edu
Journal of Business Research 49, 303–314 (2000)
 2000 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.
655 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10010

H

istorically, the contributions of the business professorate have been measured in three areas: research,
teaching, and service. The professor spends a career
finding, developing, and communicating the product of an
academic community’s common scholarship. He or she then
uses and shares this knowledge with the important constituencies in which the collective academy is involved.
An integral part of this collection of a discipline’s knowledge resides in the article publication process (cf. Brewer, 1998;
Lusch, 1999; Parasuraman, 1998; Stewart, 1999; Varadarajan,
1996; Winer, 1998; Woodside, 1997). Articles are presented
for publication in a journal, sent to journal reviewers to control
for quality, and then selected articles are published and read
by members of the academic community. The perception of
a journal’s quality is an important aspect of the “weight” given
to articles published in a specific journal, and for explaining
the article’s ability to contribute to the scholarly dialogue.
As stated in Zinkhan and Leigh (1999), the quality of a
journal is of interest to an academic community for three
primary reasons. First, a community wants to discern a particular journal’s role in advancing the discipline’s (and crossdiscipline’s) body of knowledge. Second, the perceptions of

journal quality serve as surrogate indicators of scholarship
quality. As such, publications in more “prestigious” journals
probably explain most of the differences found in academic
rank, pay, and tenure status (cf. Hult and Hasselback, 1998).
Third, benefits of publishing in quality journals extend beyond
the individual faculty level. The quality of a university, college,
and department are all influenced by the quality of journals
in which the collective faculty has published. In addition, we
believe another reason why journal quality is important is because authors, in attempting to discharge their professorate
duties efficiently and effectively, need to understand both the
level of scholarship and breadth of contribution required for a
manuscript to be “publishable” at a given level of journal quality.
ISSN 0148-2963/00/$–see front matter
PII S0148-2963(00)00124-7

304

J Busn Res
2000:49:303–314

G. A. Knight et al.

Table 1. Percentage of JBR Articles per Discipline, 1985–1999
Discipline

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

Total

%

Buyer behavior

Finance/accounting
International business
Management and organization behavior
Marketing
Business and marketing research
Other
Total for year and grand totals

11
9
1
7
11
4
0
43

2
10
14

3
7
7
1
44

1
7
5
8
15
4
3
43

8
4
6
2
12

16
7
55

3
6
4
5
19
2
1
40

17
6
4
5
14
4
4

54

18
2
6
2
7
9
9
53

7
5
14
2
10
3
2
43

2
5
10
10
10
2
1
40

14
4
8
9
31
3
5
74

11
0

20
12
27
0
0
70

16
4
7
9
35
2
1
74

12
4
13
3
29
4
5
70

20
2
15
9
21
2
2
71

10
5
13
5
37
3
6
79

152
73
140
91
285
65
47
853

18
9
16
11
33
8
5
100

Note: Although an article may fit several categories, each article was assigned to one category based on the most salient category covered in the research.

Reviews of journals and journal content in business disciplines have taken a variety of approaches. For example, marketing faculty have been surveyed and asked to rank various
marketing journals whereby the journal’s familiarity and importance indices were calculated (e.g., Hult, Neese, and Bashaw, 1997). Risk and insurance productivity of faculty and
institutions have been measured using a count of journal pages
attributable to the author and school (Colquitt, Dumm, and
Gustavson, 1998). The number of author contributions has
been tallied to determine the major contributors to the finance
literature (Heck and Cooley, 1988). Finally, authors have
examined specific academic journals and academic conferences in an attempt to better understand the quality and
contributions of those particular outlets (e.g., Bashaw and
Grant, 1992; Inkpen and Beamish, 1994; Malhotra, 1996).
These subjective and objective measures, although not individually all encompassing, may collectively help one form a
fairly accurate assessment of the role authors, journals, and
institutions play in contributing to the scholarly dialogue.
Beyond simple counting, one objective measure of the quality
of contributions made of published articles is the citations that
appear in these published journal articles (Salancik, 1986). By
being used to further a particle knowledge system of a discipline, those articles cited may be of particular interest as a
quality variable. Possible levels of analysis using citations
found in journal articles could be any of the following: articles,
journals, individuals, departments, and institutions.
The Journal of Business Research (JBR) is a unique academic
journal. Rather than focusing on a single discipline or even a
subdiscipline, JBR contains articles of interest to academics in
marketing (and many of its subdisciplines), strategic management, organizational behavior, international business, accounting, and finance. Because of the wide variety of topics
covered, its high regard in the marketing discipline (Hult,
Neese, and Bashaw, 1997), and the international author contributions to the journal, we launched a thorough investigation
of JBR contributions during the 1985–1999 period.
In valuing a professor’s contributions, much subjectivity
is involved. In scholarly research, value is placed on the number of publications, the quality of the journals containing

the published manuscript, and the quality of the published
research itself. In our study, we attempt to remove a portion
of the subjectivity with respect to the role as a research publication outlet of JBR, a cross-disciplinary academic journal, by
using multiple objective measures. Specifically, we developed
rankings for number of author publications and coauthor
adjustment rankings, author’s employer rankings and coauthor adjustment rankings, counted the number of JBR citations
in 12 major journals (including JBR) with topic overlap to
that of JBR, and then finally ranked the authors and articles
by number of citations.

Citation Analysis and
Journal Quality
Zinkhan and Leigh (1999) listed six ways in which journal
quality assessments can be made. They are as follows: who
publishes the journal (commercial or academic), the reputation of the editor and/or the editorial board members, the
reputation of the authors publishing in the journal, the acceptance rate of the journal, the age of the journal, and the impact
of the journal in the academic community. We focus primarily
on the more objective measures in trying to assess the impact
of JBR. We identify the most prolific authors publishing in
JBR as a means of communicating their achievement to the
academic community, and to let the reader determine the
quality of the journal author contributors. We also evaluate
the impact JBR has had in the academic business discipline
via the use of citation analysis.
“Citations are explicit linkages between articles that have
common aspects,” (Chandy and Williams, 1994, p. 716). This
serves as an extremely critical link in building a knowledge
base in any discipline and is one of the foundations upon
which the scientific method is built. Citation analysis has been
widely accepted in many business disciplines. For example,
citation research has been conducted in accounting (Bricker,
1988; Brown and Gardner, 1985), economics (Davis and Papanek, 1984; Liebowitz and Palmer, 1984), finance (Chung and
Cox, 1990; Jensen, 1990; Zivney and Bertin, 1992), marketing

Research Productivity in JBR, 1985–1999

J Busn Res
2000:49:303–314

Table 2. Ranking of Authors Published in JBR, 1985–1999
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
7
9
10
11
12
12
14
15
15
15
18
18
20
20
20
23
24
25
26
26
26
29
29
29
32
32
32
32
32
37
37
37
40
40
40
40
44
45
46

Author

Number of
Articles

Total Number
of Authors

Darden, William R.
Woodside, Arch G.
Bearden, William O.
Dubinsky, Alan J.
Goldsmith, Ronald E.
Johnston, Wesley J.
Ferrell, O. C.
Varadarajan, P. Rajan
Lumpkin, James R.
Spekman, Robert E.
Babin, Barry J.
Futrell, Charles M.
Vitell, Scott J.
Domanski, Tomasz
Graham, John L.
Morris, Michael H.
Wilson, Elizabeth J.
Chebat, Jean-Charles
Malhotra, Naresh
Brenes, Esteban R.
Barnes, James H.
Swan, John E.
Webster, Cynthia
Samiee, Saeed
Dominguez, Luis V.
Hite, Robert E.
Hu, Michael Y.
Wilson, David T.
Hunt, Shelby D.
Kahle, Lynn R.
Lewin, Jeffrey E.
Kotabe, Masaaki
Laroche, Michel
Marr, M. Wayne
Robicheaux, Robert A.
Samli, A. Coskun
Hill, Ronald Paul
Pelton, Lou E.
Strutton, David
Lehmann, Donald R.
Parasuraman, A.
Rose, Randall L.
Skinner, Steven J.
Walker, Beth A.
Wright, Peter
Powers, Thomas L.

9
8
8
8
7
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

22
16
20
23
14
15
18
18
19
13
15
17
17
7
11
11
11
13
13
16
17
19
5
6
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
10
10
10
10
10
11
11
11
12
12
12
12
13
14
17

Note 1: Arch G. Woodside is editor of the JBR. Three of the articles listed for him are
introductions to special JBR issues.
Note 2: Authors are ranked first by the number of articles produced, and second by
the total number of authors involved in those articles.
Note 3: The remaining authors who published in the Journal of Business Review had
three or fewer articles. Fifty-eight authors have published three articles in JBR, 159
authors have published two articles in JBR, and 590 authors have published one article
in JBR during the 1985–1999 period.

(e.g., Cote, Leong, and Cote, 1991; Jobber and Simpson,
1988; Robinson and Adler, 1981; Spake and Harmon, 1997;
Zinkhan and Leigh, 1999), and operations research (Back,
1974).

305

As outlined by Zinkhan, Roth, and Saxton (1992), citations
are to be considered social exchanges between the authors
and readers. Knowledge found in journal articles is valued to
the degree they are used to understand newly formed issues
by journal readers and to build new knowledge in writing
manuscripts by journal authors. In short, business discipline
authors and publication outlets are valued and given status
in the community of other business researchers by publishing
articles that are used by other researchers.
A citation represents a recording of the use of an idea in
the development of new knowledge in journal articles. It is
an acknowledgement by the citing authors of the use of a
particular article, and by extension can be seen as a quality
indicator. “Valuable” articles will be cited and will launch and
aid new research and publication efforts. A journal that is
frequently cited is used frequently, and is held in high regard
by the community of scholars reading and publishing in the
journal. In addition, and by extension, that journal would be
more likely to attract new manuscripts from authors. Ceteris
paribus, more manuscripts mean more competition for scarce
publication space in the journal that eventually leads to a
higher quality journal. In our study, we use citation analysis
to identify JBR articles cited in 11 other business journals, the
most cited authors, and the most cited journal articles.

Methodology and Results
The objective of our study was to closely examine research
published in JBR during the period of 1985–1999. Specifically,
we addressed the following six research questions:
1. What proportion of the journal’s content is represented
by the various business disciplines?
2. What authors have most frequently published in the
journal?
3. What institutions have most frequently contributed articles to the journal?
4. How often are JBR articles cited in JBR and the 11 other
major journals that represent discipline content areas
in JBR?
5. Who are the most cited JBR authors?
6. What are the most cited JBR articles?
By answering the above research questions, we believe that
we offer the reader objective information with which to determine their perception as to the level of quality of JBR and its
authorship.
While not completely so, we somewhat arbitrarily chose
to examine the last 15 years of JBR. Understanding that the
citation usage of a journal article fades with time, we decided
not to examine each article JBR has ever published. However,
we were guided to use 15 years from the notion of an article’s
cited half-life; that is, the durability or timeliness of the useful
knowledge contained in journal articles (Zinkhan and Leigh,
1999). A benchmark-cited half-life was 7.5 for the Journal of

306

J Busn Res
2000:49:303–314

G. A. Knight et al.

Table 3. Ranking of Authors Published in JBR, Adjusted Authorship, 1985–1999
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46

Author

Number
of Articles

Total Number
of Authors

Adjustment
Factor

Webster, Cynthia
Domanski, Tomasz
Samiee, Saeed
Woodside, Arch G.
Goldsmith, Ronald E.
Dominguez, Luis V.
Hite, Robert E.
Hu, Michael Y.
Wilson, David T.
Johnston, Wesley J.
Spekman, Robert E.
Graham, John L.
Morris, Michael H.
Wilson, Elizabeth J.
Hunt, Shelby D.
Kahle, Lynn R.
Lewin, Jeffrey E.
Darden, William R.
Bearden, William O.
Babin, Barry J.
Kotabe, Masaaki
Laroche, Michel
Marr, M. Wayne
Robicheaux, Robert A.
Samli, A. Coskun
Ferrell, O. C.
Varadarajuan, P. Rajan
Chebat, Jean-Charles
Malhotra, Maresh
Lumpkin, James R.
Hill, Ronald Paul
Pelton, Lou E.
Strutton, David
Dubinsky, Alan J.
Futrell, Charles M.
Vitell, Scott J.
Lehmann, Donald R.
Parasuraman, A.
Rose, Randall L.
Skinner, Steven J.
Brenes, Esteban R.
Walker, Beth A.
Barnes, James H.
Wright, Peter
Swan, John E.
Powers, Thomas L.

4
5
4
8
7
4
4
4
4
7
6
5
5
5
4
4
4
9
8
6
4
4
4
4
4
7
7
5
5
7
4
4
4
8
6
6
4
4
4
4
5
4
5
4
5
4

5
7
6
16
14
8
8
8
8
15
13
11
11
11
9
9
9
22
20
15
10
10
10
10
10
18
18
13
13
19
11
11
11
23
17
17
12
12
12
12
16
13
17
14
19
17

.80
.71
.67
.50
.50
.50
.50
.50
.50
.47
.46
.45
.45
.45
.44
.44
.44
.41
.40
.40
.40
.40
.40
.40
.40
.39
.39
.39
.39
.37
.36
.36
.36
.35
.35
.35
.33
.33
.33
.33
.31
.31
.29
.29
.26
.24

Note 1: Arch G. Woodside is editor of JBR. Three of his articles are introductions to special JBR issues.
Note 2: The remaining authors has three or fewer articles in JBR. Only authors with four or more articles in JBR are listed.
Note 3: For a total of two authors, the number of articles is multiplied by .50; for a total of three authors, the number of articles is multiplied by .33, and so on.

Advertising (Zinkhan and Leigh, 1999); thus, we chose to
examine 15 years of JBR articles.
Initially, since JBR is a multidisciplinary academic business
journal, we wanted to know the various contributions of each
discipline, in terms of published JBR articles over the chosen
time span. In answering the first research question, we examined the content of each JBR article in the chosen time period

and classified its content as one of six business discipline
categories (a seventh category was “other”). In beginning the
process of choosing these categories, we were first guided by
the disciplinary make-up of JBR’s editorial board. Each article
was physically sorted by content. Categories were refined and
articles sorted until six content categories emerged, as well as
a seventh, which we classified as “other.”

Research Productivity in JBR, 1985–1999

J Busn Res
2000:49:303–314

307

Table 4. Ranking of Employers of Authors Published in JBR, 1985–1999
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
16
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
34
36
37
38
39
40
40
40
43
44
45
45
47
48
49
50

Institution
Louisiana State University
Texas A & M University
University of South Carolina
University of Southern California
Georgia State University
University of Memphis
University of Lodz
University of Texas, Austin
Michigan State University
Florida State University
University of Mississippi
Baylor University
University of Miami
Pennsylvania State University
Columbia University
Indiana University
Tulane University
University of Alabama
Virginia Polytechnic
Arizona State University
University of Cincinnati
Florida Atlantic University
University of Houston
Concordia University
University of Maryland
INCAE
University of Alabama, Birmingham
University of Illinois, Urbana
Georgia Institute of Technology
Iowa State University
Washington State University
University of Kentucky
University of Arkansas
Baruch College, CUNY
Northeastern University
University of North Texas
University of Central Florida
University of Delaware
Clemson University
University of Colorado, Boulder
University of Connecticut
University of Oregon
Mississippi State University
University of Toledo
Boston University
University of Utah
Kansas State University
Bradley University
Texas Tech University
University of Georgia

Number
of Articles

Total Number
of Authors

27
20
19
17
17
17
16
15
15
14
14
13
13
13
13
12
12
12
12
11
11
10
10
10
10
10
10
9
9
9
9
9
9
7
7
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7

78
90
64
40
52
62
28
39
47
43
72
33
35
43
47
37
37
38
44
11
33
28
31
33
50
67
81
21
22
27
29
36
38
19
19
19
21
25
35
15
15
15
16
17
20
20
21
23
25
31

Note 1: Employer refers to the institution where the author(s) was employed at the time of publication.
Note 2: Employers are ranked first by the number of articles produced, and second by the total number of authors involved in those articles.
Note 3: The remaining employers had six or fewer articles in JBR.

Table 1 provides the complete article category classification
and the number of articles published, by year, in each of the
categories. Articles within the marketing discipline represented the largest single category of JBR articles (33%). The

proportion of marketing articles has increased over the last 5
years, representing 41% of the articles in this time period.
Most of the other categories have remained fairly stable in
the percentages contributed to JBR’s content, except Finance/

308

J Busn Res
2000:49:303–314

G. A. Knight et al.

Table 5. Ranking of Employers of Authors Published in JBR, Adjusted Authorship, 1985–1999
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50

Institution
University of Lodz, Poland
University of Colorado, Boulder
University of Connecticut
University of Oregon
Mississippi State University
University of Southern California
University of Illinois, Urbana
University of North Texas
Georgia Institute of Technology
University of Toledo
Baylor University
University of Texas, Austin
University of Central Florida
University of Miami
Baruch College, CUNY
Northeastern University
Florida Atlantic University
Louisiana State University
University of Utah
Boston University
Georgia State University
Florida State University
University of Cincinnati
Iowa State University
Kansas State University
Michigan State University
Indiana University
Tulane University
University of Alabama
University of Houston
University of Delaware
Washington State University
University of South Carolina
Pennsylvania State University
Concordia University
Bradley University
Columbia University
Texas Tech University
University of Memphis
Virginia Polytechnic
University of Kentucky
University of Arkansas
Arizona State University
Clemson University
University of Georgia
Texas A&M University
University of Maryland
University of Mississippi
INCAE
University of Alabama, Birmingham

Number
of Articles

Total Number
of Authors

Adjustment
Factor

16
7
7
7
7
17
9
8
9
7
13
15
8
13
7
7
10
27
7
7
17
14
11
9
7
15
12
12
12
10
8
9
19
13
10
7
13
7
17
12
9
9
11
8
7
20
10
14
10
10

28
15
15
15
16
40
21
19
22
17
33
39
21
35
19
19
28
78
20
20
52
43
33
27
21
47
37
37
38
31
25
29
64
43
33
23
47
25
62
44
36
38
47
35
31
90
50
72
67
81

.57
.47
.47
.47
.44
.43
.43
.42
.41
.41
.39
.38
.38
.37
.37
.37
.36
.35
.35
.35
.33
.33
.33
.33
.33
.32
.32
.32
.32
.32
.32
.31
.30
.30
.30
.30
.28
.28
.27
.27
.25
.24
.23
.23
.23
.22
.20
.19
.15
.12

Note 1: Employer refers to the institution where the author(s) was employed at the time of publication.
Note 2: The remaining employers have six or fewer articles in JBR
Note 3: For two authors, the number of articles is multiplied by .50; for three authors, the number of articles is multiplied by .33, and so on.

Accounting, which dropped to 4% over this period (from
9%), and Business/Marketing Research, which dropped to 3%
(from 8%).
To determine the most frequent authors publishing in JBR,

we simply counted the articles that list them as an author and
noted the total number of coauthors for each article. We
defined an article as being any published full “regular” article,
research notes, or comment found in the journal. We should

Research Productivity in JBR, 1985–1999

J Busn Res
2000:49:303–314

309

Table 6. Citation Impact: The 12 Investigated Journals
Journal
Journal of Business Research
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science
Journal of Advertising
Journal of Consumer Research
Journal of Marketing
Journal of Marketing Research
Journal of Retailing
Journal of International Marketing
Journal of International Business Studies
Academy of Management Journal
Strategic Management Journal
Journal of Accounting and Economics

note that we counted as articles several of the editor’s or guest
editor’s introductions to special issues. It is our experience
that these introductions often launch meaningful research
endeavors and are frequently cited. Table 2 presents the raw
article count for the top JBR contributors along with the total
number of authors represented by their work. We ranked
them first according to total number of articles and then based
on the total number of authors. A contributor is ranked higher
if, given the same number of published articles, the articles
had fewer total authors. The late William R. Darden, with
nine articles, has published the most articles over the 15-year
period, followed closely by Woodside, Bearden, and Dubinsky
with eight articles. In all, 46 authors have published four or
more articles during this time span.
Table 3 is a re-ranking of those 46 authors with four or
more published articles during the 15-year time period examined. This ranking is based on an adjustment factor that considers the total number of authors involved with the published
articles. This recognizes that an author has contributed more,
individually, with a single author article than with a multiauthor paper. The adjustment factor was derived by dividing
the total number of articles by the total number of authors.
Using this factor, Cynthia Webster was the highest rated JBR
contributing author with an adjustment factor of .80, followed
by Tomasz Domanski with an adjustment factor of .71.
Tables 4 and 5 are rankings of institutions based on the
author’s affiliation at the time of article publication. Table 4
represents the “raw” ranking similar to Table 2 for the individual author. As shown in Table 4, Louisiana State University
(LSU) is the leading institutional contributor to JBR during
the 1985–1999 time period, with 27 articles being published
by at least one author with an LSU affiliation. The ranking is
based, first, on number of articles, and second, on total number of authors. The notion was that the fewer the number
of authors, the greater the institutional impact. Texas A&M
University was second with 20 articles, followed closely by
the University of South Carolina with 19 articles. Exactly 50

Primary JBR Area Covered
All
Marketing
Buyer behavior
Buyer behavior
Marketing
Business and marketing research
Buyer behavior and marketing
International business
International business
Strategic management and organizational behavior
Strategic management and organizational behavior
Finance and accounting

institutions were listed with 7 or more JBR articles in the 15year time period.
Table 5 summarizes the adjusted ranking of institutions
similar to Table 3 for the individual author. It includes those
same 50 institutions with 7 or more published articles during
the 15-year time period examined. This ranking is based on
an adjustment factor that considers the total number of authors
involved with the published articles. As has been mentioned,
this recognizes, and adjusts for, that portion of the article
attributable to the institution alone. We derived the adjustment factor by dividing the total number of articles by the total
number of authors. Based on this adjustment, the University of
Lodz, in Poland, had the highest adjustment factor of .57.
Long-time JBR readers will note that in two special issues—
Research in marketing in a Centrally Planned Economy: Poland” [14 (4), (1986)] and “Marketing in Poland in a Centrally
Planned Economy” [24 (1), (1992)]—many of the authors
were from the University of Lodz. The University of Colorado–
Boulder, the University of Connecticut, and the University of
Oregon all had the next highest adjustment factor of .47.
In Table 6, we present the list of 12 journals (including
JBR) that we investigated to better understand the impact of
JBR on the academic business discipline. The journals we
selected correspond to the content areas mentioned in Table
1. The number of journals to be included in the citation
analysis for each topic was loosely determined by the number
of review board members for that topic (i.e., the more review
board members, the more journals selected for that particular
field for the citation analysis). Table 7 lists the number of JBR
citations found in each of the listed journals by the journals
publishing date by year and total. As might be expected, the
journal with the most JBR citations was JBR, with 289 citations.
The Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science was second
with 90 citations, followed by the Journal of Marketing with
75 citations.
Table 8 lists, in order of rank, authors who had the highest
impact with their JBR articles, as measured in the number of

310

52
14
2
0
11
13
4
8
4
1
0
0
109
31
15
2
1
12
6
14
4
3
1
0
0
89
48
16
0
0
3
4
8
7
8
5
0
0
99
45
5
2
1
7
4
1
11
3
3
1
0
83
24
12
1
4
7
1
6
4
2
2
0
0
63
9
6
7
8
6
3
7
2
5
1
1
0
55
11
0
2
4
11
3
3
—
5
1
1
0
41
4
9
7
1
4
3
7
—
3
8
0
0
46
3
4
3
2
3
2
0
—
4
0
1
0
22
9
1
0
0
4
1
1
—
1
0
0
0
17
3
3
0
3
1
0
2
—
0
0
0
0
12
17
2
2
0
0
1
0
—
0
0
0
0
22
5
0
1
0
0
1
0
—
0
0
0
0
7
289
90
30
30
75
50
55
39
47
23
4
0
732
Note 1: The Journal of International Marketing was started in 1993.

Journal

Journal of Business Research
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science
Journal of Advertising
Journal of Consumer Research
Journal of Marketing
Journal of Marketing Research
Journal of Retailing
Journal of International Marketing
Journal of International Business Studies
Academy of Management Journal
Strategic Management Journal
Journal of Accounting and Economics
Total Count

96
95
94
93
92
91
86

87

88

89

90

Number of Citations per Year

28
3
1
6
6
8
2
3
9
1
0
0
67

99

Rank

97

Table 8. Highest-Impact Authors in JBR, Ranked by Number of
Citations in the 12 Journals, 1985–1999

Total JBR
Articles Cited

Table 7. Impact of JBR in the 12 Journals, 1986–1999

G. A. Knight et al.

98

J Busn Res
2000:49:303–314

1
1
3
4
4
6
6
6
6
6
11
11
13
13
15
15
15
18
18
18
18
18
23
23
23
23
27
27
27
27
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
31

Author

Raw Number of
Citations in 12 Journals

Spekman, Robert E.
Hunt, Shelby D.
Chonko, Lawrence B.
Cavusgil, S. Tamer
Futrell, Charles M.
Babakus, Emin
Boller, Gregory W.
Sager, Jeffrey K.
Johnston, Mark W.
Varadarajan, P. Rajan
Graham, John L.
Dubinsky, Alan J.
Parasuraman, A.
Darden, William R.
Beatty, Sharon E.
Homer, Pamela
Gro¨nroos, Christian
Johnston, Wesley J.
Babin, Barry J.
Wilson, Elizabeth J.
Naor, Jacob
George, William
Bearden, William O.
Samiee, Saeed
Campbell, N. C. G.
Czepiel, John A.
McGrath, Mary Ann
Chambers, Terry M.
Krapfel, Robert E.
Ferrell, O. C.
Lant, Theresa K.
Loken, Barbara
Danes, Jeffrey E.
Hunt, Kenneth A.
Mentzer, John T.
Sriram, Ven
Biswas, Abhijit
Moore, William L.
Gannon, Martin J.
Goldsmith, Ronald E.
Grimm, Curtis
Smith, Ken G.
Robicheaux, Robert A.
Lumpkin, James R.

19
19
18
17
17
16
16
16
16
16
14
14
13
13
12
12
12
10
10
10
10
10
9
9
9
9
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7

Note 1: The remaining authors had six or fewer citations in the 12 journals.

raw citations found in the 12 investigated journals. Robert E.
Spekman and Shelby D. Hunt had the highest total citations
in the 12 journals, with 19 citations each. Spekman and Hunt
were closely followed by Lawrence B. Chonko, who had a
total of 18 citations. In total, 44 authors were listed with 7
or more citations.
In Table 9 we ranked the authors by adjusted number of
citations, and then by adjusted number of JBR articles. The
adjusted number of citations was calculated by summing the

Research Productivity in JBR, 1985–1999

J Busn Res
2000:49:303–314

311

Table 9. Highest-Impact Authors in JBR, Ranked by Adjusted Number of Citations in the 12 Journals, 1990–1999
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
9
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
16
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
26
28
29
30
31
31
33
34
35
36
36
36
39
40
41
42
43
44

Author

Raw Number
of Citations

Adjusted Number
of Citations

Number of
Articles in JBR

Adjusted Number
Articles in JBR

Gro¨nroos, Christian
George, William
Campbell, N. C. G.
Czepiel, John A.
Babakus, Emin
Boller, Gregory W.
Naor, Jacob
Chonko, Lawrence B.
Lant, Theresa K.
Loken, Barbara
Spekman, Robert E.
Hunt, Shelby D.
Cavusgil, S. Tamer
Graham, John L.
Danes, Jeffrey E.
Hunt, Kenneth A.
Sriram, Ven
Mentzer, John T.
Sager, Jeffrey K.
Samiee, Saeed
Johnston, Mark W.
Biswas, Abhijit
Babin, Barry J.
Johnston, Wesley J.
McGrath, Mary Ann
Beatty, Sharon E.
Homer, Pamela
Parasuraman, A.
Futrell, Charles M.
Moore, William L.
Chambers, Terry M.
Krapfel, Robert E.
Varadarajan, P. Rajan
Darden, William R.
Dubinsky, Alan J.
Gannon, Martin J.
Grimm, Curtis
Smith, Ken G.
Goldsmith, Ronald E.
Wilson, Elizabeth J.
Bearden, William O.
Robicheaux, Robert A.
Lumpkin, James R.
Ferrell, O. C.

12
10
9
9
16
16
10
18
7
7
19
19
17
14
7
7
7
7
16
9
16
7
10
10
8
12
12
13
17
7
8
8
16
13
14
7
7
7
7
10
9
7
7
8

12.00
10.00
9.00
9.00
8.00
8.00
5.00
3.60
3.50
3.50
3.17
2.71
2.43
2.33
2.33
2.33
2.33
2.33
2.29
2.25
1.78
1.75
1.67
1.67
1.60
1.50
1.50
1.44
1.42
1.40
1.33
1.33
1.33
1.30
1.08
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.91
0.90
0.88
0.64
0.62

2
1
1
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
6
4
3
5
1
1
2
3
3
4
3
3
6
7
2
3
3
4
7
3
2
3
7
9
8
2
2
2
7
5
8
4
7
7

1
1
1
0.67
0.40
0.40
0.50
0.40
0.50
0.50
0.46
0.44
0.43
0.45
0.33
0.33
0.40
0.43
0.33
0.67
0.33
0.50
0.40
0.47
0.40
0.38
0.38
0.33
0.41
0.43
0.33
0.33
0.39
0.38
0.35
0.29
0.29
0.29
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.40
0.37
0.39

Note 1: Authors are ranked first by the adjusted number of citations, and second by the adjusted number of articles.
Note 2: For two authors, the number of citations/articles is multiplied by 0.50; For three authors, the number is multiplied by 0.33, and so on. Only cited articles are included.

total number of citations for each article by the fraction of
the article represented by that author. For example, a singleauthored article had 1.0 as the multiplier, an article with two
authors had .5 as the multiplier, and an article with three
authors had .33 as the multiplier, and so on. The previously
explained adjusted number of articles in JBR was used as the
tie-breaker in the rankings. Christian Gro¨nroos was ranked
highest with 12 adjusted citations, whereas William George
was ranked second with 10 adjusted citations. In total, 44
authors with 7 or more “raw” citations were ranked.

Table 10 is a ranking of the most influential JBR articles
during the 15-year period examined. A total of 11 articles
during this period have been cited 8 times or more. The most
cited article was written by Emin Babakus and Gregory W.
Boller, entitled “An Empirical Assessment of the SERVQUAL
Scale” [24 (3), (1992)]. The fact that the article by Babakus and
Boller appeared midway through the time period examined
(1985–1999) lends additional support to the article’s quality
and to JBR’s increasing ability to produce high-impact articles.
Indirectly, this also lends support to the notion that the quality

312

J Busn Res
2000:49:303–314

G. A. Knight et al.

Table 10. Most Influential JBR Articles, 1985–1999

Rank
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
7
7
10
10

Number of
Citations in
the 12 Journals

Article
Babakus, Emin, and Boller, Gregory W.: An Empirical Assessment of the SERVQUAL Scale.
24(3), (1992): 253–268.
Chonko, Lawrence B., and Hunt, Shelby D.: Ethics and Marketing Management: An Empirical
Examination. 13(4), (1985): 339–360.
Graham, John L.: The Problem-Solving Approach to Negotiations in Industrial Marketing.
14(6), (1986): 549–566.
Gro¨nroos, Christian: Relationship Approach to Marketing in Service Contexts: The Marketing
and Organizational Behavior Interface. 20(1), (1990): 3–12.
George, William: Internal Marketing and Organizational Behavior: A Partnership in Developing
Customer-Conscious Employees at Every Level. 20(1), (1990): 63–70.
Johnston, Mark W., Parasuraman, A., Futrell, Charles M., and Sager, Jeffrey. Performance and
Job Satisfaction Effects on Salesperson Turnover: A Replication and Extension. 16(1), (1988):
67–84.
Campbell, N. C. G.: An Interaction Approach to Organizational Buying Behavior. 13(1), (1985):
35–48.
Cavusgil, S. Tamer, and Naor, Jacob: Firm and Management Characteristics as Discriminators of
Export Marketing Activity. 15(1987): 221–235.
Czepiel, John A.: Service Encounters and Service Relationships: Implications for Research.
20(1), (1990): 13–22.
Samiee, Saeed, and Walters, Peter G. P.: Influence of Firm Size on Export Planning and
Performance. 20(3), (1990): 235–248.
Spekman, Robert E, and Johnston, Wesley J.: Relationship Management: Managing the Selling
and the Buying Interface. 14(6), (1986): 519–532.

of the articles in JBR is improving. The second most cited JBR
article was written by Lawrence B. Chonko and Shelby D.
Hunt, entitled “Ethics and Marketing Management: An Empirical Examination” [13 (4), (1985)].
In Table 11 we present the most cited articles for each
of three 5-year time intervals: 1985–1989, 1990–1994, and
1995–1999. This makes for a “natural adjustment,” as newly
published articles have less time to make an impact than
longer published articles. For the 1985–1989 time period
the previously mentioned Chonko and Hunt article ranked
highest with 14 citations. For the 1990–1994 time period the
Babakus and Boller article led with 16 citations. Finally, for
the most recent time period, 1995–1999, the article by Lois
A. Mohr and Mary Jo Bitner, entitled “The Role of Employee
Effort in Satisfaction with Service Transactions” [32 (3),
(1995)], led with six citations.

Conclusion
One of the most important conclusions that can be drawn
from the results reported in this study is the fact that JBR is
truly an international interdisciplinary journal. The interdisciplinary nature of JBR is reflected in its published articles (18%
buyer behavior, 9% finance/accounting, 16% international
business, 11% strategic management and organizational behavior, 33% marketing, 8% business and marketing research,

16
14
13
12
10
10
9
9
9
8
8

and 5% other topics). JBR’s strong international business focus
is indicated by its authorship and topic coverage (16% of all
articles published during the 1985–1999 time period examined), with a trend toward increasing this focus during the
last 5 years.
Another noteworthy point is the “partnership” between JBR
and the Society for Marketing Advances. This partnership has
resulted in JBR being viewed as one of the premier journals
in the field of marketing, accounting for 33% of the articles
published in JBR during the time period of 1985–1999, with
a quality ranking of number eight in the marketing discipline
(Hult, Neese, and Bashaw, 1997). The quality ranking within
the marketing field is noteworthy, especially in light of JBR’s
interdisciplinary focus. In fact, JBR has maintained this prominent position during the decade-and-a-half examined (1985–
1999), as indicated in ranking studies in 1987 (Luke and
Doke, 1987) and 1997 (Hult, Neese, and Bashaw, 1997).
In summary, JBR has become a natural home for interdisciplinary research and research in a variety of functional business
disciplines. If the last 15 years are an indication, JBR is well
positioned to retain and perhaps increase its quality reputation
and leadership position among academic business journals.

We gratefully acknowledge the helpful suggestions of Randy Dumm, and the
data collection assistance of Mari Knight.

Research Productivity in JBR, 1985–1999

J Busn Res
2000:49:303–314

313

Table 11. Most Influential JBR Articles, 1985–89, 1990–94, and 1995–99
Number of Citations
Rank, Article

1985–1989

1990–1994

1995–1999

Total

4

6

4

14

4

6

3

13

1

8

1

10

1

6

2

9

4

5

9

4

2

8

6

10

16

2

10

12

2

8

10

1

8

9

2

6

8

7

7

7

7

6

6

5

5

4

4

4

4

3

3

1985–1989
1 Chonko, Lawrence B., and Hunt, Shelby D.: Ethics and Marketing
Management: An Empirical Examination. 13(4), (1985): 339–360.
2 Graham, John I.: The Problem-Solving Approach to Negotiations in
Industrial Marketing. 14(6), (1986): 549–566.
3 Johnston, Mark W., Parasuraman, A., Futrell, Charles M., and Sager,
Jeffrey. Performance and Job Satisfaction Effects on Salesperson
Turnover: A Replication and Extension. 16(1), (1988): 67–84.
4 Campbell, N. C. G.: An Interaction Approach to Organizational
Buying Behavior. 13(1), (1985): 35–48.
4 Cavusgil, S. Tamer, and Naor, Jacob: Firm and Management
Characteristics as Discriminators of Export Marketing Activity.
15(1987): 221–235.
5 Spekman, Robert E., and Johnston, Wesley, J.: Relationship
Management: Managing the Selling and the Buying Interface. 14(6),
(1986): 519–532.

2

1990–1994
1 Babakus, Emin, and Boller, Gregory W.: An Empirical Assessment of
the SERVQUAL Scale. 24(3), (1992): 253–268.
2 Gro¨nroos, Christian: Relationship Approach to Marketing in Service
Contexts: The Marketing and Organizational Behavior Interface.
20(1), (1990): 3–12.
3 George, William: Internal Marketing and Organizational Behavior: A
Partnership in Developing Customer-Conscious Employees at Every
Level. 20(1), (1990): 63–70.
4 Czepiel, John A.: Service Encounters and Service Relationships:
Implications for Research. 20(1), (1990): 13–22.
5 Samiee, Saeed, and Walters, Peter G. P.: Influence of Firm Size on
Export Planning and Performance. 20(3), (1990): 235–248.
6 Sriram, Ven, Krapfel, Robert, and Spekman, Robert. Antecedents to
Buyer-Seller Collaboration: An Analysis from the Buyer’s Perspective.
25(4), (1992): 303–320.
6 Darden, William R., and Babin, Barry J. Exploring the Concept of
Affective Quality: Expanding the Concept of Retail Personality. 29(2),
(1994): 101–110.
1995–1999
1 Mohr, Lois A., and Bitner, Mary Jo. The Role of Employee Effort in
Satisfaction with Service Transactions. 32(3), (1995): 239–252.
2 Singhapakdi, Anusorn, Vitell, Scott J., and Kraft, Kenneth. Moral
Intensity and Ethical Decision-Making of Marketing Professionals.
36(3), (1996): 245–256.
3 Boyle, Brett A., and F. Robert Dwyer. Power, Bureaucracy, Influence
and Performance: Their Relationships in Industrial Distribution
Channels. 32(3), (1995): 189–200.
3 Young, Joyce A., Gilbert, Faye W., and McIntyre, Faye S. An
Investigation of Relationalism across a Range of Marketing
Relationships and Alliances. 35(2), (1996): 139–152.
4 Robin, Donald P., Reidenbach, R. Eric, and Forrest, P. J. The
Perceived Importance of the Ethical Decision-making of Ad
Managers. 35(1), (1996): 17–28.
Note 1: For the period 1985–1989, the remaining articles had 7 or fewer total citations in the 12 journals.
Note 2: For the period 1990–1994, the remaining articles had 6 or fewer total citations in the 12 journals.
Note 3: For the period 1955–1999, the remaining articles had 2 or fewer total citations in the 12 journals.

314

J Busn Res
2000:49:303–314

References
Back, Harry B.: A Comparison of Operations Research and Management Science Based on Bibliographic Citations. Interfaces 4
(1974): 42–45.
Bashaw, R. Edward, and Grant, E. Stephen: An Analysis of Leading
Contributors to the SMA’s Proceedings: 1973–1991, in Marketing:
Perspectives for the 1990’s, Robert L. King, ed., Southern Marketing
Association, New Orleans, LA. 1992, pp. 192–196.
Brewer, Thomas L.: Letter from the New Editor. Journal of International Business Studies 29 (1998): vi–ii.
Bricker, Robert J.: Knowledge Preservation in Accounting: A Citational Study. Abacus 24 (1988): 120–131.
Brown, Lawrence D., and Gardner, John C.: Applying Citation Analysis to Evaluate the Research Contributions of Accounting Faculty
and Doctoral Programs. Accounting Review 60 (1985): 262–277.
Chandy, P. R., and Williams, Thomas G. E.: The Impact of Journals
and Authors on International Business Research: A Citational
Analysis of JIBS Articles. Journal of International Business Studies
25 (1994): 715–728.
Chung, Kee H., and Cox, Raymond: Patterns of Productivity in
Finance Literature: A Study of the Bibliometric Distributions.
Journal of Finance 45 (1990): 301–309.
Colquitt, L. Lee, Dumm, Randy E., and Gustavson, Sandra G.: Risk
and Insurance Research Productivity: 1987–1996. Journal of Risk
and Insurance 65 (1998): 711–742.
Cote, Joseph A., Leong, Siew M., and Cote, John: Assessing the
Influence of Journal of Consumer Research: A Citation Analysis.
Journal of Consumer Research 18 (1991): 402–410.
Davis, Paul, and Papanek, Gustav G.: Faculty Ratings of Major Economics Departments by Citation. American Economic Review 74
(1984): 225–230.
Heck, Jean Louis, and Cooley, Philip: Most Frequent Contributors
to the Finance Literature. Financial Management Autumn (1988):
100–108.
Hult, G. Tomas M., and Hasselback, James R.: A Report of Gender
and Professional Age of the Marketing Professorate. Journal of
Marketing Education 20 (1998): 35–40.
Hult, G. Tomas M., Neese, William T., and Bashaw, R. Edward:
Faculty Perceptions of Marketing Journals. Journal of Marketing
Education 19 (1997): 37–52.
Inkpen, Andrew C., and Beamish, Paul W.: An Analysis of TwentyFive Years of Research in the Journal of International Business
Studies. Journal of International Business Studies 25 (1994): 703–
713.
Jensen, Michael C.: Citation Index Ratings of the Journal of Financial
Economics. Journal of Financial Economics 28 (1990): 3–5.

G. A. Knight et al.

Jobber, David, and Simpson, Paul: A Citation Analysis of Selected
Marketing Journals. International Journal of Research in Marketing
5 (1988): 137–142.
Liebowitz, Stanley J., and Palmer, John P.: Assessing the Relative
Impacts of Economic Journals. Journal of Economic Literature 22
(1984): 77–88.
Luke, Robert H., and Doke, E. Reed: Marketing Journal Hierarchies:
Faculty Perceptions, 1986–1987. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 15 (1987): 74–78.
Lusch, Robert F.: From the Editor. Journal of Marketing 63 (October
1999): 1.
Malhotra, Naresh K.: The Impact of the Academy of Marketing Science on Marketing Scholarship: An Analysis of the Research Published in JAMS. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 24
(1996): 291–298.
Parasuraman, A.: Editorial. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science
26 (Winter 1998): 3–5.
Robinson, Larry M., and Adler, Roy: Measuring the Impact of Marketing Scholars and Institutions: An Analysis of Citation Frequency.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 9 (1981): 147–162.
Salancik, G. R.: An Index of Subgroup Influence in Dependency
Networks. Administrative Science Quarterly 31 (1986): 194–211.
Spake, Deborah F., and Harmon, Susan K.: Assessing Productivity
Based on Publication in the Top Four Marketing Journals, 1990–
1996: A Multiple Method Approach, in Enhancing Knowledge Development in Marketing (Vol. 8), William M. Pride, and G. Tomas
M. Hult, eds., American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL.
1997, pp. 191–198.
Stewart, David W.: Beginning Again: Change and Renewal in Intellectual Communities. Journal of Marketing 63 (October 1999): 2–4.
Varadarajan, P. Rajan: From the Editor: Reflections on Research and
Publishing. Journal of Marketing 60 (October 1996): 3–6.
Winer, Russell S.: From the Editor. Journal of Marketing Research 35
(February 1998): iii–iv.
Woodside, Arch G.: Contributions of Business-to-Business Marketing
Journals: Introduction to the Special Issue. Journal of Business
Research 38 (March 1997): 177.
Zinkhan, George M., Roth, Martin, and Saxton, Mary Jane: Knowledge Development and Scientific Status in Consumer Behavior
Research: A Social Exchange Perspective. Journal of Consumer
Research 18 (1992), 282–291.
Zinkhan, George M., and Leigh, Thomas W.: Assessing the Quality
Ranking of the Journal of Advertising, 1986–1997. Journal of
Advertising 28 (1999): 51–63.
Zivney, Terry L., and Bertin, William J.: Publish or Perish: What
the Competition is Really Doing. Journal of Finance 47 (1992):
295–329.