Journal list fetishism and the perversion of scholarship: reactivity and the ABS list

Willmott, Hugh ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1321-7041 2011. Journal list fetishism and the perversion of scholarship: reactivity and the ABS list. Organization 18 (4) , pp. 429-442. 10.1177/1350508411403532

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

The case for using academic journals lists is critically scrutinised. An effect of their use, it argued, is to stifle diversity and constrict scholarly innovation. A monoculture is fostered in which a preoccupation with shoehorning research into a form prized by elite, US-oriented journals overrides a concern to maintain and enrich the diversity of topics, the range of methods and the plurality of perspectives engaged in business and management research. Use of a particular journal list, such as the one prepared by the Association of Business Schools (ABS), can come to dominate the scholarly terrain of a particular discipline with consequences that can be damaging to funding as well as to research culture.

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Publication
Status:	Published
Schools:	Business (Including Economics)
Subjects:	H Social Sciences > H Social Sciences (General) L Education > LB Theory and practice of education > LB2300 Higher Education
Uncontrolled Keywords:	ABS; business schools; innovation; journal lists; research assessment; research culture
Publisher:	Sage
ISSN:	1350-5084
Last Modified:	21 Oct 2022 09:52
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/38127

Citation Data

Cited 325 times in Scopus. View in Scopus. Powered By Scopus® Data

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item