Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:56:22.156Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ranking the Presses: Political Scientists' Evaluations of Publisher Quality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Larry P. Goodson ,
Bradford Dillman  and
Anil Hira
Larry P. Goodson
Affiliation:
American University in Cairo
Bradford Dillman
Affiliation:
Koç University
Anil Hira
Affiliation:
Tulane University
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
News
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 32 , Issue 2 , June 1999 , pp. 257 - 262
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association 1999

Footnotes

*

We wish to thank the more than 400 members of APSA (including some of the most distinguished and senior members of the discipline) from over 200 departments and organizations in 22 countries who participated in the survey or test sample.

References

Christensen, James A., and Sigelman, Lee. 1985. “Accrediting Knowledge: Journal Stature and Citation Impact in Social Science.” Social Science Quarterly 66(December): 964–76.Google Scholar
Garand, James C. 1990. “An Alternative Interpretation of Recent Political Science Journal Evaluations.” PS: Political Science and Politics 23(September): 444–51.Google Scholar
Giles, Micheal W., Mizeli, Francie, and Patterson, David. 1989. “Political Scientists' Journal Evaluations Revisited.” PS: Political Science and Politics 22(September): 613–17.Google Scholar
Giles, Micheal W., Mizeli, Francie, and Wright, Gerald C. 1975. “Political Scientists' Evaluations of Sixty-Three Journals.” PS: Political Science and Politics 8(Summer): 254–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackman, Robert W., and Siverson, Randolph M. 1996. “Rating the Rating: An Analysis of the National Research Council's Appraisal of Political Science Ph.D. Programs.” PS: Political Science and Politics 29(June): 155–60.Google Scholar
Katz, Richard S., and Eagles, Munroe. 1996. “Ranking Political Science Programs: A View from the Lower Half.” PS: Political Science and Politics 29(June): 149–54.Google Scholar
Kelaher, Christopher J., and Artinian, Edward. 1992. “How to Find a Publisher in Political Science.” PS: Political Science and Politics 25(June): 262–64.Google Scholar
Kelaher, Christopher J. 1994. “How to Select a Publisher in Political Science.” PS: Political Science and Politics 27(March): 84–90.Google Scholar
Klingemann, Hans-Dieter. 1986. “Ranking the Graduate Departments in the 1980s: Toward Objective Qualitative Indicators.” PS: Political Science and Politics 19(Summer): 651–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowery, Robert C., and Silver, Brian D. 1996. “A Rising Tide Lifts All Boats: Political Science Department Reputation and the Reputation of the University.” PS: Political Science and Politics 29(June): 161–67.Google Scholar
Miller, Arthur H., Tien, Charles, and Peebler, Andrew. 1996a. “The American Political Science Review Hall of Fame: Assessments and Implications for an Evolving Discipline.” PS: Political Science and Politics 29(March): 73–83.Google Scholar
Miller, Arthur H., Tien, Charles, and Peebler, Andrew. 1996b. “Department Rankings: An Alternative Approach.” PS: Political Science and Politics 29(December): 704–17.Google Scholar
National Research Council. 1995. Research Doctorate Programs in the United States: Continuity and Change. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Robey, John S. 1982. “Reputations vs. Citations: Who Are the Top Scholars in Political Science?” PS: Political Science and Politics 15(Spring): 199–200.Google Scholar
Welch, Susan, and Hibbing, John R. 1983. “What Do the New Ratings of Political Science Departments Measure?” PS: Political Science and Politics 16(Summer): 532–40.Google Scholar