Journal ratings changes: implications for author diversity and research characteristics

Abstract

Concerns have been raised in the business and management literature regarding the role of journal rating lists. Rather than simply reflecting journal performance, these lists may influence the nature of scholarly work produced and published. This study investigates the impact of upgrades and downgrades and inclusions and removals, respectively, to two widely used journal rating sources -- the Academic Journal Guide and the Financial Times List -- on author and paper characteristics. We analyse a large sample of articles, spanning all sub-fields in business and management, published over a 12-year period. Our analysis indicates that female authors publish significantly more in journals that experience downgrades or removal from these lists compared to journals that maintain or improve their ratings. We also observe that authors affiliated with African universities are less represented in journals that have newly entered or been upgraded on these lists. However, our findings do not show a significant effect of journal list recompositions on the most commonly employed research methods. We observe that list entry and rating upgrades are associated with significantly improved article readability. Overall, our results contribute to the ongoing discussion regarding the effects of journal lists on publication outcomes, particularly for groups that are already underrepresented in academic publishing