商业和管理教育(BME)的主要作者,按性别对经济教育奖学金进行文献计量分析

Carlos J. Asarta, Regina F. Bento, Zachary Ferrara, Charles J. Fornaciari, A. Hwang, K. Dean, Diego Mendez-Carbajo
{"title":"商业和管理教育(BME)的主要作者,按性别对经济教育奖学金进行文献计量分析","authors":"Carlos J. Asarta, Regina F. Bento, Zachary Ferrara, Charles J. Fornaciari, A. Hwang, K. Dean, Diego Mendez-Carbajo","doi":"10.4337/aee.2023.01.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study examines productivity in Business and Management Education (BME) scholarship, identifying the “top 96” BME authors of the last decade, extending the author productivity conversation initiated by Arbaugh et al. (2017), and exploring the degree to which women feature in the list. The rankings proved very dynamic: approximately 55% of the top-ranked authors are new to the list, with 38% of those authors being female. The BME field continues to offer opportunities for establishing a profile as a highly productive author, since barriers for entry into the list remain relatively low: five articles continue to be the threshold for inclusion. Accounting expanded its dominance over other disciplines, with the number of accounting education scholars ranked increasing from 28 to 34. The number of highly productive authors affiliated with institutions outside of the United States has increased significantly when compared to the 2005–2014 study, suggesting that the call for wider international participation in BME scholarship is beginning to produce movement. We document differences in the content of the scholarship produced by leading male and female authors in economic education, noting that those differences tend to blend when they work together.","PeriodicalId":269953,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Economics Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Key authors in business and management education (BME) with a bibliometric analysis of economic education scholarship by gender\",\"authors\":\"Carlos J. Asarta, Regina F. Bento, Zachary Ferrara, Charles J. Fornaciari, A. Hwang, K. Dean, Diego Mendez-Carbajo\",\"doi\":\"10.4337/aee.2023.01.04\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study examines productivity in Business and Management Education (BME) scholarship, identifying the “top 96” BME authors of the last decade, extending the author productivity conversation initiated by Arbaugh et al. (2017), and exploring the degree to which women feature in the list. The rankings proved very dynamic: approximately 55% of the top-ranked authors are new to the list, with 38% of those authors being female. The BME field continues to offer opportunities for establishing a profile as a highly productive author, since barriers for entry into the list remain relatively low: five articles continue to be the threshold for inclusion. Accounting expanded its dominance over other disciplines, with the number of accounting education scholars ranked increasing from 28 to 34. The number of highly productive authors affiliated with institutions outside of the United States has increased significantly when compared to the 2005–2014 study, suggesting that the call for wider international participation in BME scholarship is beginning to produce movement. We document differences in the content of the scholarship produced by leading male and female authors in economic education, noting that those differences tend to blend when they work together.\",\"PeriodicalId\":269953,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Economics Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Economics Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4337/aee.2023.01.04\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Economics Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/aee.2023.01.04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究考察了商业和管理教育(BME)奖学金的生产力,确定了过去十年中“前96名”BME作者,扩展了Arbaugh等人(2017)发起的作者生产力对话,并探讨了女性在名单中的地位。事实证明,排名非常活跃:大约55%的前几名作者是新上榜的,其中38%是女性。BME领域继续为建立高产作者的形象提供机会,因为进入该列表的门槛仍然相对较低:五篇文章仍然是纳入的门槛。会计学在其他学科中的主导地位进一步扩大,会计教育学者的排名从28位增加到34位。与2005-2014年的研究相比,隶属于美国以外机构的高产作者数量显著增加,这表明呼吁更广泛地参与BME奖学金的国际活动正在开始产生运动。我们记录了经济教育领域的主要男性和女性作者在学术内容上的差异,并指出这些差异在一起工作时往往会融合在一起。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Key authors in business and management education (BME) with a bibliometric analysis of economic education scholarship by gender
This study examines productivity in Business and Management Education (BME) scholarship, identifying the “top 96” BME authors of the last decade, extending the author productivity conversation initiated by Arbaugh et al. (2017), and exploring the degree to which women feature in the list. The rankings proved very dynamic: approximately 55% of the top-ranked authors are new to the list, with 38% of those authors being female. The BME field continues to offer opportunities for establishing a profile as a highly productive author, since barriers for entry into the list remain relatively low: five articles continue to be the threshold for inclusion. Accounting expanded its dominance over other disciplines, with the number of accounting education scholars ranked increasing from 28 to 34. The number of highly productive authors affiliated with institutions outside of the United States has increased significantly when compared to the 2005–2014 study, suggesting that the call for wider international participation in BME scholarship is beginning to produce movement. We document differences in the content of the scholarship produced by leading male and female authors in economic education, noting that those differences tend to blend when they work together.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Easy expectations and racial bias in economics instructor ratings The tradeoff between economic freedom and economic performance: a classroom exercise Understanding sex differences when majoring in economics: what little we know, reasons for knowledge gaps, and a research agenda of unanswered questions Improving long-term retention: promoting distributed practice in an introductory economics course Key authors in business and management education (BME) with a bibliometric analysis of economic education scholarship by gender
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1