Printer Friendly

Voting with their feet: in which journals do the most prolific finance researchers publish?

The financial economics literature has experienced rapid growth over the past 40 years, triggering a dramatic increase in the number of journals. We employ a new method to analyze the current pecking order of finance journals. Specifically, we analyze the publication records of prolific authors to provide evidence regarding the perceived quality of a set of 23 high-impact finance journals. Assuming these scholars target the "best" research outlets, their publication records can reveal information about their subjective rankings of the next-best alternatives to the traditional elite finance journals. The results suggest that prolific authors are most likely to target outlets that have raised their profile in recent years (e.g., Financial Management and Financial Analysts Journal) and new specialized finance journals (e.g., Journal of Financial Markets, Journal of Corporate Finance, and Journal of Financial Intermediation) when publishing outside the set of elite journals.

**********

The well-known cliche "publish or perish" has long described life in research universities. However, as Corbett (1992) notes, the implications of this requirement, for both aspiring and established academics, have changed dramatically in recent decades, as research benchmarks for promotion and tenure have skyrocketed. Although most disciplines now have more journals than during the 1950s and 1960s, competition for slots in the highest quality journals remains fierce. For example, Danielson and Heck (2010) find that a relatively small number of authors account for a disproportionate share of the articles in a set of 15 high-impact accounting journals. (1) The changing research landscape has been particularly visible in the field of finance, where the volume of research has grown exponentially in recent decades. Heck and Cooley (2005) report that for 72 leading finance journals, the inaugural publication dates (and the cumulative number of journals in operation by the end of the specified time period) are distributed as follows: prior to 1960 = 3 (3), 1960-1969 = 4 (7), 1970-1979 = 11 (18), 1980-1989 = 12 (30), 1990-1999 = 40 (70), and 2000-2005 = 2 (72). (2)

Weston (1994) notes that many of the ideas that now dominate financial theory and practice (e.g., portfolio theory, capital budgeting, capital structure, dividend policy, efficient market theory, asset pricing models, option pricing theory, and agency theory) were developed during the heart of this growth period. As the finance literature branched out in these related, but also very different directions, new journals were established in specific topical areas (e.g., financial markets, corporate finance, derivatives). Although authors now have more outlets from which to choose before submitting a manuscript, it has become increasingly difficult to identify those finance journals that truly have credibility. This has complicated the task of evaluating the research portfolios of candidates for tenure, promotion, or merit awards. This process is especially vulnerable to error when, as is the case at many universities, some of the individuals evaluating the research portfolios are from other disciplines (e.g., marketing or history professors evaluating the research of a finance scholar).

In the field of finance, identifying a set of elite journals is a fairly noncontroversial task. The Journal of Finance (JF), the Journal of Financial Economics (JFE), and the Review of Financial Studies (RFS) appear at the top of most finance journal ranking lists and dominate the field in terms of citations (Borokhovich, Bricker, and Simkins, 2000). Historically, the Journal of Business (JB) and the Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis (JFQA) have rounded out the set of top tier finance journals. In studies published before the RFS had firmly established its reputation, the JB and the JFQA typically were ranked in the top four journals specializing in financial research (Alexander and Mabry, 1994; Zivney and Reichenstein, 1994). In later studies (Oltheten, Theoharakis, and Travlos, 2005), the JB and the JFQA are listed just behind the top three finance journals.

It is more difficult to specify the journals that come next. Yet this question is important as a high-quality manuscript can be rejected by elite journals for a variety of reasons, such as space constraints or the topic not deemed timely by the journal's editorial board. Due to the intense competition for slots in elite journals, Griffiths and Winters (2005) find that faculty members at schools outside the top 50 research institutions typically do not have multiple publications (if any) in the elite finance journals. Thus, it is likely that the vitae of finance professors at most research universities will include at least some publications outside the top five journals.

Until the mid-1990s, journals classified in the second tier typically included the Financial Analysts Journal (FAJ), Financial Management (FM), the Financial Review (FR), the Journal of Applied Corporate Finance (JACF), the Journal of Banking and Finance (JBF), the Journal of Futures Markets (JFU), the Journal of Financial Research (JFR), and the Journal of Portfolio Management (JPM). After the top five finance journals, these eight journals, listed alphabetically here, are the highest ranked, dedicated finance journals (i.e., journals that publish primarily finance research) in Alexander and Mabry (1994). (3) As specialized journals commenced publishing during the 1990s (e.g., Journal of Financial Intermediation [JFI], Journal of Financial Markets [JFM], Journal of Corporate Finance [JCF], Journal of Empirical Finance [JEF], and European Financial Management [EFM]), at least some evidence suggests that the pecking order of finance journals began to change. For example, Chan, Fok, and Pan (2000) rank the JEF and the JF/just behind the JFQA using citation data from 1997 to 1998. Similarly, survey results in Oltheten et al. (2005) suggest that many of the new journals had established high-quality reputations by the early 2000s.

Given that most researchers will never publish in an elite journal, or will, at most, publish one or two elite articles, gaining a better understanding of the perceived quality of the "next-best" finance journals can help aspiring (and established) researchers make informed decisions about where to submit articles that cannot be placed in an elite journal. To provide such evidence, this paper breaks from traditional journal ranking methods (e.g., citation analysis or surveys) and focuses on the behavior of the most prolific financial researchers. In particular, which outlets are these scholars most likely to target when publishing outside the set of elite journals? And, how have these preferences shifted over time, as the population of high-quality finance journals has expanded?

To analyze the publication activity of prolific authors, we first summarize appearances by individual author, from 1970 to 2009, in the set of 23 dedicated finance journals with the highest "worldwide" ranking in Oltheten et al. (2005). We then identify two sets of prolific authors: 1) individuals with five or more career publications across all 23 journals and 2) scholars with five or more career publications in the set of five elite finance journals (JF, JFE, RFS, JFQA, and JB). Finally, we calculate the percentage of the appearances in each of the 23 journals from 1970 to 2009, and in various sample subperiods, attributed to each set of prolific authors. This method can identify shifts in the publication preferences of prolific authors across time, and can differentiate between the behaviors of the two sets of prolific authors.

The results reveal that many of the traditional (i.e., established before 1990) nonelite journals experienced noticeable declines in the percentage of appearances by prolific authors as the expanding population of finance journals during the 1980s and 1990s spread the research output of prolific authors across more outlets. The most noteworthy exceptions to this trend are FM and the FAJ, both of which benefited from evolving editorial policies that now give preference to rigorous, empirical papers. Depending upon how prolific authors are identified (e.g., publications across all 23 journals vs. publications in the elite five), the current ranking of finance journals, based on the implicit votes cast by the 1990-2009 publication decisions of prolific authors, differs. Several of the newer second tier journals (e.g., JFI and RF) rank noticeably higher when prolific authors are identified using only appearances in the five elite journals. When the prolific author definition is broadened to include appearances in all 23 journals, the ranking of several of the older second tier journals (e.g., JFR and FR) improve. Thus, the publication preferences of or publication opportunities available to different subsets of prolific authors may not be the same.

Excluding the JB, which published its last issue in 2006, and averaging the results from the two sets of prolific authors, the 10 highest ranked finance outlets now include the four surviving elite journals (in order, RFS, JF, JFE, and JFQA) followed by FM, the JFM, the FAJ, the JCF, the JACF, and the JFI. Thus, prolific authors are more likely to target outlets that have raised their profile in recent years (e.g., FM and FAJ) and new, specialized finance journals (e.g., JFM, JCF, and JFI) when publishing outside the set of elite journals.

I. Assessing Finance Journal Quality

Because quality matters, most successful researchers in finance (as well as in other fields) strive to publish articles in elite journals, despite the long odds (Griffiths and Winters, 2005). Although some financial researchers successfully place articles in elite accounting, economics, or management journals, this is not an easy path to navigate either. Publishing in elite journals in these related disciplines can be just as competitive as it is in finance (Danielson and Heck, 2010), and finding topics that straddle the line between finance and one of these fields is no small task. Therefore, it is likely that some high-quality financial research manuscripts will not find a home in any elite journal (either in finance or a related field). When this happens, what are the next best research outlets in the field of finance?

A. Surveys and Citation Data

Traditionally, journal quality has been assessed using survey results (Coe and Weinstock, 1983; Borde, Cheney, and Madura, 1999; Oltheten et al., 2005; Currie and Pandher, 2011) or citation data (Mabry and Sharplin, 1985; Alexander and Mabry, 1994; Zivney and Reichenstein, 1994; Borokhovich et al., 2000; Chan et al., 2000; Borokhovich, Lee, and Simkins, 2011). (4) However, the effectiveness of these approaches decreases as one progresses down the pecking order of journals. For example, some finance journal surveys (Oltheten et al., 2005) cover journal populations that also include elite accounting and economics journals. The presence of elite journals from related fields diverts "votes" from the second tier finance journals, reducing the ability of a survey to distinguish between the nonelite finance outlets.

The ability of citation counts to reveal differences in journal quality also declines outside the set of elite journals. An article appearing in a second tier journal can be cited less frequently than an article of equal quality appearing in an elite journal due to "snobbery," as some authors may try to limit the number of nonelite journal articles appearing on a reference list. At the same time, citation counts of articles appearing in some journals can be artificially inflated if an editor "asks" authors of conditionally accepted papers to consider adding references to articles previously published by that journal (Wilhite and Fong, 2012). Citation counts of nonelite journals can be especially susceptible to such manipulation, as the author pools at these journals typically will include less experienced researchers, who are unlikely to balk at such requests to add gratuitous references. Since nonelite journals have lower citation counts to begin with, the relative ranking of these journals can be influenced by this process.

B. An Alternative Ranking Approach

In contrast to these traditional approaches, this paper assesses journal quality through the publication decisions of prolific finance authors. In particular, which journals do these scholars target when they cannot place a manuscript in an elite journal? The publication records of successful researchers can shed light on journal quality for two reasons. First, authors who publish frequently do so because they write excellent papers. The inclusion of articles by these individuals will contribute positively to the overall quality of a journal. In addition, prolific authors are actively involved in the research community and have educated opinions about the relative, and evolving, quality of various journals. Assuming these authors submit articles to the "best possible" outlet (based on their estimates of the probability of acceptance and the payoff from acceptance given the career incentives the particular researcher faces), their publication records will reveal information about their subjective ranking of journals.

We acknowledge that research quantity does not necessarily imply research quality. Indeed, quantity and quality can act as substitutes. For example, an article by an author with few lifetime publications can make a significant contribution to the literature. It is also true that some authors publish numerous articles in lower level journals, with no noticeable impact on the literature. However, it is difficult for a researcher to secure multiple appearances in the best academic journals unless the individual continues to produce high-quality work.

To implement this approach, we define two sets of finance journals: 1) the elite five and 2) a population of the 18 next best finance journals. Together, these 23 journals comprise our population of high-impact finance journals. We identify prolific authors based on lifetime appearances in all 23 of these journals and, separately, by appearances within just the set of five elite journals. We then calculate the percentage of appearances in each individual journal by the two sets of prolific authors. We interpret the ranking of journals by prolific author appearances as evidence about the authors' subjective opinions about relative journal quality. We are primarily interested in the ranking of the 18 nonelite journals.

Our approach is similar to that in Chen and Huang (2007), who assess journal quality based on the percentage of appearances by authors affiliated with the top 20 (or 80) research institutions. In contrast, we track appearances by individual prolific authors, defined as scholars whose career research output exceeds specific benchmarks. Thus, each researcher classified as prolific in this study retains that status throughout his/her entire career, even if the individual's university affiliation changes. In addition, the population of prolific authors in this study includes successful scholars who may never have been affiliated with an elite university. Perhaps the most important difference between this study and Chen and Huang (2007) is that we provide information about how publication trends have evolved over the past 40 years in response to the ever increasing number of high-quality outlets available to financial researchers.

II. Data

This study documents the publication preferences of those scholars who compiled the most impressive research records in the field of finance from 1970 to 2009. This section identifies how we selected the 23 finance journals evaluated in this paper, how we defined the sets of prolific authors, and how we calculated the percentage of journal content contributed by these authors.

A. The 23 High-Impact Journals

Because there are now well over 200 finance journals, it is not practical to evaluate the relative quality of every finance journal, nor would it be informative to select prolific authors based on publication activity across such a wide range of journal quality. Indeed, Cabell's Directory of Publishing Opportunities (accessed online during July 2012) listed 144 journal titles that include the word "Finance" and another 69 titles that include the word "Financial." There are also finance journals that do not include either of these words in their title (e.g., Journal of Portfolio Management and Journal of Derivatives). We first narrow this population to the top 40 journals that publish finance-related research using the worldwide ranking in Oltheten et al. (2005). We reduced this list to 23 by omitting 17 journals that primarily publish articles in accounting or economics. We exclude these titles from our set of high-impact finance journals for two reasons. First, because our goal is to determine where prolific finance authors publish when they cannot place an article in an elite journal (in either finance or a related field), we exclude elite accounting and economics journals. In addition, the journal evaluation method employed in this study creates a bias against journals that specialize outside the field of finance. In particular, we use the percentage of appearances in a journal by prolific finance authors as an indicator of journal quality. If this percentage is low simply because a journal publishes very few finance-related articles, the method employed in this study would understate the quality of that journal. (5)

A couple of the excluded titles, notably the Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking (JMCB), the Journal of International Money and Finance (JIMF), and the Journal of Monetary Economics (JME), publish a substantial amount of banking-related research and arguably could have been included in our set of high-impact finance journals. However, these journals also publish studies in areas (e.g., international macroeconomics, monetary policy, etc.) that are traditionally underrepresented in the mainstream finance journals, potentially limiting the percentage of journal content from prolific finance authors. Although similar arguments could be made for excluding the JBF, the results in Alexander and Mabry (1994) reveal that articles published in the JBF are more likely to be cited in the JF, the JFE, the RFS, and the JFQA than are articles in the JMCB, the JME, and the JIMF. This result suggests that the JBF has historically published content that is closer to mainstream finance than the JMCB, the JME, and the JIMF. Thus, we include the JBF in our set of high-impact finance journals. (6)

The 23 high-impact finance journals include five elite finance journals, nine second tier journals established prior to 1990, and nine second tier journals established in 1990 or thereafter. The Appendix contains a complete list of these journals, including the year in which each journal started and the acronym used to reference each journal in this paper. (7) The importance of the 23 titles in our set of high-impact journals is confirmed by Keloharju (2008), who used 22 of these journals (excluding the Journal of Applied Corporate Finance) in a sample of 29 influential finance journals from which the 300 most cited articles in finance were identified. The seven outlets classified as finance journals in Kelohaiju's (2008) study, but excluded here, include the JMCB, the JIMF, the JME, the International Review of Finance, the Journal of Financial Services Research, the Journal of Multinational Financial Management, and Finance and Stochastics. Although all seven of these journals were included in Keloharju's (2008) initial journal sample, only three of these journals, the JMCB, the JME, and Finance and Stochastics, published at least one of the 300 most cited articles in finance.

B. The Prolific Authors

To identify prolific authors, we collected, from journal table of contents, author information for all articles and notes published by the 23 high-impact journals from 1970 to 2009. We credit authors with one appearance for each article published in these journals, regardless of the number of coauthors on the article. (8) Comments, abstracts, and book reviews are excluded from the analysis. Because the inaugural year of 18 of the 23 journals occurs after 1970, the study includes all articles and notes published by these journals through 2009. Articles and notes published in the JB, the FAJ, the JF, the FR, and the JFQA prior to 1970 are excluded from the analysis.

To provide information about the publication preferences of authors with varying degrees of accomplishment, we use two different benchmarks to isolate prolific authors: 1) authors with five or more appearances in all 23 journals and 2) authors with five or more appearances in the five elite journals. In addition, the paper reports on the publication records of those authors with no appearances in the elite five. By looking at these three sets of authors, the results distinguish between the behavior of the "elite of the elite" (i.e., authors with multiple publications in the five elite journals) and the behavior of a broader set of prolific authors (i.e., authors with multiple publications across the entire set of 23 high-impact journals). (9)

C. Evaluating Prolific Author Content

The measure of journal quality used in this paper is the percentage of the total appearances in a journal during a specified period by prolific authors. We calculate this measure for each individual journal, for each time period t (t = 1970-2009, 1970-1979, 1990-2009, 2000-2009, and 10 two-year subperiods from 1980 to 1999), using Equation (1):

%Prolific Author Content, = Appearances in Journal by Prolific Authors,/Total Journal Appearances,. (1)

When calculating the %Prolific Author Content for each period t, we use appearances by those authors whose research productivity exceeds the prolific author benchmark (i.e., five or more appearances in the five elite journals; five or more publications in all 23 journals) across the entire 1970-2009 period. We acknowledge that prolific authors could be separately identified within each subperiod. However, this method would understate prolific author content within the sample subperiods (assuming that the relevant benchmarks remained at five appearances). For example, an author with four appearances from 1970 to 1989 and four appearances from 1990 to 2009 would be classified as prolific across the entire 1970-2009 period, but not in any of the sample subperiods. By identifying prolific authors based on appearances across the entire 1970-2009 period, we make the implicit assumption that the ability of a prolific researcher to identify the best outlet for a manuscript was present throughout the individual's active research career.

Since we identify prolific authors using appearances from 1970 to 2009, our journal ranking is based on both articles published before and those published after the individuals reached the benchmark of five appearances. Given that the career incentives facing a researcher change over time (e.g., aspiring academics target those journals that will carry the most weight in tenure decisions during the early career years), individuals might target different journals as their careers progress. To evaluate this possibility, we report on the "career stage" of the prolific authors publishing in the journals during each subperiod. To do this, we identified the graduation year for 99% of the elite prolific authors and 93% of the authors with five or more appearances across all 23 journals. For those individuals for whom we could not identify a graduation date and for those who do not have a Ph.D., we used the date of the author's first publication in the specified set of journals as a proxy for the graduation date. (10) For each journal, during every subperiod (t) analyzed, we calculate the average graduation date by summing the graduation years for the N prolific author appearances in the journal during that time frame, and dividing this total by N. This calculation is shown in Equation (2):

Average Graduation [Year.sub.t] = [N.summation over (a=1)] Graduation Year for [Author.sub.a]/N. (2)

If the average graduation year is earlier, this signifies that the prolific authors contributing to a journal are in a more established (later) stage of their careers. The average graduation date can shed light on the following questions. What type of prolific author, aspiring or established, is most likely to target each of the 23 journals in this study? In addition, have the demographic characteristics of the authors appearing in the various journals changed over time?

III. Overall Publication Patterns (1970-2009)

Table I summarizes information about the number of authors and the number of appearances in the complete set of 23 high-impact finance journals and in the smaller set of five elite finance journals. The table separately lists this information for authors reaching benchmarks ranging from just one article in the specified subset of journals to authors with 10 or more such appearances. The results in this table highlight the challenges authors face when trying to secure publications in either set of journals.

Focusing first on the complete set of 23 high-impact journals, it is noteworthy that well over half of the authors appearing in these journals do so only once (57.45% = 100% to 42.55%). Approximately 16% of the authors can claim five or more publications in these journals, and only 6% have accumulated 10 or more appearances. Yet authors with five (10) or more articles account for almost 56% (over 36%) of the total appearances in these journals. It is not easy to secure a publication in any of these 23 journals, as prolific authors appear to leave few available pages for other researchers.

As difficult as it is to publish multiple times in the set of 23 high-impact journals, Table I suggests that it is even more of an accomplishment to appear in one of the elite five. Of the 15,868 individuals appearing in at least one of the 23 high-impact journals, only 5,840 (36.8%) have published one or more articles in the set of five elite journals. Within this set of 5,840 elite authors, only 15.5% have written five or more articles in the elite journals and fewer than 5% have 10 or more appearances. Authors with five (10) or more appearances account for almost 53% (29%) of the total appearances in the five elite journals. As in the set of 23 high-impact journals, the content of the elite five is dominated by contributions from a select group of authors.

IV. Contributions by Prolific Authors to Individual High-Impact Journals

Table II summarizes contributions to each of the 23 high-impact journals, over the entire 1970-2009 period, by the two sets of prolific authors: 1) authors with five or more appearances in all 23 journals and 2) authors with five or more appearances in the five elite journals. In addition, the table summarizes contributions to the 18 second tier journals by authors with no appearances in the elite five. Table II lists the 23 journals in three groups: 1) the elite five, 2) the second tier journals established before 1990, and 3) the second tier journals established in 1990 or thereafter. Within each category, the journals are listed by the inaugural publication date, with the oldest journals listed first.

The results in Table II confirm that the content of the five elite journals has been dominated by contributions from prolific authors. Almost 68% of the appearances in these journals from 1970 to 2009 were penned by authors with five or more publications across all 23 high-impact journals, whereas almost 53% were by authors with five or more appearances in the five elite journals. The JFE has been the most exclusive of the elite five with almost 74% of its appearances by authors with five or more appearances in the 23 high-impact journals and over 61% by scholars with five or more elite five publications. The JB has been the most inclusive of the elite journals with 51.5% of its appearances by individuals with five or more appearances in the 23 high-impact journals and just over 36% by those with five or more elite five publications. The percentage of articles in the JB by prolific finance authors is slightly lower than in the other elite journals as the original mission of the JB was to publish high-quality research from all business disciplines. Over time though, the mix of articles in the JB gradually shifted toward topics in financial economics.

The content of the second tier journals as a whole, including both those with inaugural dates before and after 1990, has also been dominated by contributions from prolific authors. For the pre-1990 second tier journals, almost 51% of the appearances are by authors with five or more appearances across all 23 journals. For the post-1990 second tier journals, 47% of the appearances are by authors with five or more appearances across all 23 journals. However, the second tier journals have offered publishing opportunities to a broader set of authors than have the five elite journals. For the pre-1990 journals, less than 16% of the appearances are by scholars with five or more elite five appearances. For the post-1990 second tier journals, only 18.5% of the appearances are by authors with five or more elite appearances. Within each set of second tier journals, over 50% of the appearances are by authors with no appearances in the elite five journals. Individuals who have never published in an elite finance journal account for less than 40% of the total appearances in just three of the nonelite journals: FM, JFI, and JFM.

The results in Table II suggest that the two sets of second tier journals (pre- and post-1990) contain similar amounts of prolific author content. However, these statistics can provide a misleading comparison, as Table II averages publication data across all 40 years. Prior to 1990, articles that were rejected by the five elite journals were often submitted next to the pre-1990 second tier journals (with the exception of the JACF, all of the pre-1990 second tier journals were in place by 1981). As the specialty finance journals began operation during the 1990s, and the pre-1990 journals faced new competition, it is possible that the publication preferences of prolific authors changed. The next section of the paper investigates this possibility.

V. The Evolution of the Finance Literature

This section documents the evolution of prolific author content in each of the 23 journals from 1970 to 2009. We report on the publication activity of prolific authors within 12 subperiods: 1970-1979, 2000-2009, and 10 two-year periods from 1980 to 1999. For each journal, during every subperiod analyzed, we report both the percentage of journal content attributed to each set of prolific authors, calculated using Equation (1), and the average graduation date of those individuals, calculated using Equation (2).

We do not break the first or last decades into subperiods as the portion of the total appearances attributed to prolific authors increases progressively from 1970 to 1979 and decreases slightly from 2000 to 2009 for all (active) sample journals. These patterns occur because we identify prolific authors based solely on publication activity from 1970 to 2009. This method understates prolific author content during the early sample years, as individuals with five or more lifetime publications in the sample journals, but less than five articles after 1970, are not classified as prolific authors. This method also understates prolific author content during the later sample years because in any given year, some journal articles (even in the most elite outlets) are penned by newly minted scholars. Even though some researchers who published their first article from 2000 to 2009 will eventually surpass the benchmarks we use to identify prolific authors, not all of these individuals had done so by 2009. The effects of these distortions are minimized by combining the activity from the first and last decades into 10-year subperiods.

A. The Elite Five

Table III reports the prolific author contributions to the five elite journals. Panel A lists the total number of appearances in each of the five elite journals (and the total appearances in all 23 journals) in each of the 12 subperiods. Panel B (Panel C) analyzes publication activity by individuals with five or more appearances in the set of all 23 journals (in the five elite journals). For each subperiod, Panels B and C provide, for each journal and for the 23 journals in total, the percentage of appearances by the defined set of prolific authors and the average graduation date of these individuals.

Panel A documents the tremendous growth in the number of articles published in the finance literature. Across all 23 journals, there were 20,483 appearances from 2000 to 2009 (an average of 4,097 every two years = 20,483/5) compared to 4,654 appearances from 1970 to 1979 (an average of 931 every two years). The bulk of this increase can be attributed to the advent of new journals. However, a portion of this increase can be attributed to two other factors. First, over the past 40 years, the frequency of coauthored papers in the finance literature has continued to increase. For example, the 4,654 appearances from 1970 to 1979 were associated with 3,183 articles, an average of 1.46 authors per paper. From 2000 to 2009, the 20,489 appearances were spread over 9,656 articles, and average 2.12 authors per paper. In addition, several existing journals have, over time, increased the number of issues (and articles) published each year. Of the five elite journals, the JFE and the RFS have followed this strategy. In 1994 and prior years, the JFE published six or fewer issues a year. From 1995 to 1997, the JFE increased the number of issues each year, reaching their current schedule of 12 issues a year in 1997. In 2006 and before, the RFS published four issues each year. In 2007 and 2008, this number increased to six and, in 2009, the journal started publishing 12 issues each year.

The information in Panels B and C provide a striking picture of the extent to which prolific authors dominated the content of the JF, the JFQA, the JFE, and the RFS from the early 1980s to 1999. Authors with five or more publications across all 23 journals accounted for over 70% of the appearances in both the JF and the JFQA in every subperiod from 1984 to 1999. For the JFE and the RFS, contributions from such authors exceeded 75% in every subperiod from the journals' inception through 1999 (Panel B). Authors with five or more publications in the five elite journals typically accounted for over 60% of the appearances in the JF, the JFE, and the RFS from 1984 to 1999 (Panel C). Although prolific author appearances (as a percentage of total appearances) in the four surviving elite journals declined slightly from 2000 to 2009 in both Panels B and C, these percentages will almost certainly increase retroactively in future years, as some scholars who published their first article during the 2000s will eventually surpass the prolific author benchmarks.

Although prolific authors account for a large portion of the appearances in the elite journals, the information in Table III suggests that these journals did not build or maintain their reputations simply by giving preference to established scholars. In the vast majority of the subperiods in Table III, in both Panels B and C, the average graduation year for prolific authors appearing in the four surviving elite journals (JF, JFQA, JFE, and RFS) is approximately equal to or is later than the average graduation year for prolific authors publishing across all 23 high-impact journals. This result implies that the elite journals not only publish articles by the luminaries in the field of finance, they also help to identify and develop the next generation of prolific authors.

B. The Pre-1990 Second Tier Journals

Table IV tracks the evolution of the pre-1990 second tier journals. Panel A reports on the total number of appearances (by subperiod) for these journals. Panels B and C analyze appearance activity by prolific authors with five or more publications in all 23 journals and in the five elite journals, respectively.

Panel A reveals that the average number of appearances per year in most of the traditional second tier journals has fluctuated within relatively stable ranges across time, even as the overall number of appearances in the finance literature has exploded. The most notable exception is JBF, which averaged less than 150 appearances every two years during the 1980s. During the 1990s, the average number of appearances every two years increased to almost 300 and, since 2000, this journal has averaged almost 625 appearances every two years (= 3,124/5). The number of appearances in JPM and JFU also increased in the 2000s, relative to earlier years, but to a much lesser extent. Both of these journals averaged over 200 appearances every two years since 2000, increasing from two-year averages of between 150 and 200 in prior years. (11)

As competition for high-quality manuscripts heated up in the 1980s (following the launch of RFS) and into the 1990s (as the post-1990 journals commenced operations), many of the pre-1990 second tier journals experienced a decline in the percentage of articles attributed to prolific authors. These declines are relatively muted when prolific authors are identified using publication activity across all 23 journals (Panel B). The most notable declines prior to 2000 in Panel B were experienced by the FR and the JFR. Appearances by this set of authors in the FR decreased from over 60% of all appearances during the 1980s (ranging from 62.5% to 76.5%) to less than 60% of all appearances during four of the five two-year subperiods during the 1990s (ranging from 55.2% to 60.2%). Appearances by these authors in the JFR averaged over 70% during four of the five two-year subperiods from 1984 to 1993, before declining to 62% from 1996 to 1997 and 52.4% from 1998 to 1999. Since 2000, prolific author appearances in the JBFA, the JPM, and the JBF have all declined by slightly more than the average across all 23 journals.

When prolific authors are defined as those individuals with five or more appearances in the five elite journals (Panel C), the decline in prolific author content in the pre-1990 second tier journals is more pronounced, with six journals displaying visible downward trends in such content: FR, JBFA, JPM, JBF, JFR, and JFU. The most dramatic of these declines were felt by the FR and the JFR. During the 1980s, contributions by this set of prolific authors averaged between 17.2% and 28.6% of all appearances at the FR. However, since 1992 appearances by these authors have averaged less than 9.4% of the appearances in the FR. Prior to 1990, appearances by these prolific authors in the JFR exceeded 20% during each subperiod, averaging over 35% prior to 1980, and just over 30% from 1988 to 1989. After 1990, however, appearances in the JFR by these authors have averaged less than 20% in each subperiod, with a low of 8.8% from 1998 to 1999.

It is also noteworthy that the type of prolific author publishing in the FR and the JFR has evolved. Prior to 1990, authors publishing in either of these journals had average graduation years comparable to the average across all 23 journals in both Panels B and C. In Panel B, this correlation has continued for both journals through 2009. In Panel C, however, the career stage of those authors appearing in the FR and the JFR has shifted over time. From 1992 to 2009, the average graduation year for authors appearing in the FR was at least 3.4 years earlier than the average across all 23 journals in every subperiod except 1996-1997. For the JFR, the average graduation year for prolific authors appearing in the journal was at least 3.5 years earlier than the average across all 23 journals from 1998 to 2009. During the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s, JFR and FR were viewed by many to be the premier second tier finance journals. The average graduation year data from more recent years suggests that the reputation of these journals remains intact with at least some of the prolific authors who were active prior to 1990. However, prolific authors in an earlier career stage (i.e., those fighting for promotion and tenure) now appear to be less likely to target these journals. As the FR and the JFR have lost market share within this important segment of the prolific author population, the volume of prolific author content in these journals has declined.

Only two of the traditional second tier journals were able to maintain relatively constant shares of prolific author content (in both Panels B and C) throughout the entire 1980-2009 period: FM and FAJ. To remain relevant in the increasingly competitive finance literature, each of these journals has demanded more rigorous empirical articles over time. The results in Panels B and C suggest that these policies have worked, as the journals continue to attract submissions from both sets of prolific authors.

Three of the journals, the FAJ, the JPM, and the JACF, specialize in applied research. Although each of these journals publishes an impressive amount of prolific author content (in both Panels B and C), the average graduation dates for prolific authors appearing in these journals since 1988 are typically earlier than the graduation year averages across all 23 journals, often by over four years. These results suggest that either prolific authors delay developing this portion of their research portfolios until later in their careers (i.e., after earning promotion and tenure) or the perceived value of applied research is lower to scholars who have entered the field in, say, 1990 or later, than it was to individuals who started their careers in earlier years.

C. The New (Post-1990) Second Tier Journals

Table V focuses on the brief lifespan of the post-1990 second tier journals. Panel A provides the total number of appearances (by subperiod) for these journals. Panels B and C analyze appearance activity by prolific authors with five or more publications in all 23 journals and in the five elite journals, respectively.

The results in Panel A reveal that much of the growth of the finance literature during the 1990s can be attributed to these nine journals. In addition, several of these journals have continued to fuel the growth of the finance literature into the 2000s, as they have expanded their output. For example, the average number of appearances every two years from 2000 to 2009 has increased by at least 30 appearances relative to the two-year averages from the 1990s for five of these journals: Mathematical Finance (MF), JEF, Pacific Basin Finance Journal (PBFJ), JCF, and EFM. (12)

The results in Panels B and C allow author characteristics to be compared before and after each journal's reputation had become established. This issue is important as journals are sometimes launched with inaugural issues containing articles by luminaries in the field. If the outlet is successful, contributions from such individuals will continue. However, if a journal fails to gain widespread acceptance in the scholarly community, appearances by prolific authors will become less frequent.

When prolific authors are defined as individuals with five or more appearances in all 23 journals, Panel B identifies five journals that were unable to sustain their early momentum: JEF, JD, EFM, and RF. For each of these journals, the percentage of journal content by this set of prolific authors declined by over 15 percentage points from the inaugural two-year period to 2000-2009. For the JEF and the JD, the decline exceeded 30 percentage points.

When prolific authors are defined as individuals with five or more appearances in the elite journals, Panel C identifies six journals that were unable to maintain the initial level of prolific author content: MF, JEF, PBFJ, JD, JCF, and EFM. For each of these journals, the percentage of journal content by this set of prolific authors declined by over 10 percentage points from the inaugural two-year period to 2000-2009. Again, this decline exceeded 30 percentage points for both the JEF and the JD.

To their credit, none of the journals launched during the 1990s appeared to give undue preference to submissions by established, prolific authors during the early years of the journal's existence. In both Panels B and C, the average graduation date for each of the nine journals during the initial two-year period was similar to the overall average across all journals. This suggests that the prolific authors appearing in the new journals included roughly the same mix of established and aspiring prolific authors as the journal population as a whole. What is noteworthy, however, is that the type of prolific author publishing in the less successful new journals has gradually changed over time. Panel C reveals that in 2000-2009, the average graduation year for prolific authors (five or more elite articles) appearing in MF, the PBFJ, the JD, and EFM is approximately four years earlier or more than the average across all journals. Thus, it appears that researchers striving for tenure and promotion at many research universities no longer consider these journals to be among the most desirable second tier destinations for papers that cannot be placed in an elite journal.

VI. The Current Pecking Order of Finance Journals

What does the current pecking order of finance journals look like? The results in Table VI address this question. Table VI ranks the 23 journals in this study based on the percentage of 1990-2009 (Panel A) and 2000-2009 (Panel B) journal content by prolific authors. The results in Panel A rank the journals based on publication activity over a longer period and are less likely to be distorted by short-term (nonpermanent) trends. The results in Panel B are more current. The Panel B results also necessarily exclude the pre-2000 publications of the post-1990 second tier journals (as all nine of these journals published their first issues prior to 2000) and focus on publishing activity after the journals' reputations started taking shape. Thus, each ranking has unique benefits, and a comparison of the two rankings can reveal recent shifts in perceived journal quality.

Panels A and B report rankings using the two prolific author definitions individually (Columns 2 and 3) and based on a weighted-average of the two rankings (Column 1). In each case, journals with higher percentages of content from prolific authors rank higher. The weighted-average ranking is calculated as the sum of the percentage of appearances by the two sets of prolific authors divided by two. Since authors with five or more appearances in the five elite journals are included in both groups, the publication records of these authors are more heavily weighted in this index. Column 4 lists the percentage of journal content by authors with no elite five appearances, but does not rank the journals on this basis.

Panel A of Table VI reports that over the entire 1990-2009 period, the JF, the RFS, the JFE, the JFQA, and the JB remain the top five journals (based on the weighted-average ranking in Column 1). Moving to the more recent 2000-2009 period, however, Panel B reveals that the RFS has surpassed the JF in prolific author content. While, the percentage of prolific author content has decreased in the most recent 10-year subperiod in each of the RFS, the JF, the JFE, and the JFQA, these declines are modest. As previously discussed, these declines are caused, in part, by the fact that the population of authors publishing articles from 2000 to 2009 includes some individuals at the beginning of their research careers, who have not yet accumulated enough publications (but will at some future date) to be classified as prolific using the benchmarks defined in this study.

After the top four surviving journals (excluding the JB), the top 10 surviving journals, based on the weighted-average rankings in Column 1, include the same titles in Panels A and B of Table VI, but in a slightly different order. Across the entire 1990-2009 period, the journals on this list are (in order): FM, JFM, JACF, JFI, JCF, and FAJ. From 2000 to 2009, this ranking now reads: FM, JFM, FAJ, JCF, JACF, and JFI. It is noteworthy that the journals ranked from fifth to tenth place include just one pre-1990 general interest journal (FM), three specialty journals with inaugural dates after 1990 (JFI, JCF, and JFM), and two journals that focus on applied finance (FAJ and JACF). The inclusion of the FAJ And the JACF on these lists confirms that prolific authors consider applied finance to be an integral part of the literature. In addition, the volume of prolific author content in these journals sets a high-quality benchmark that contributions from other authors must meet.

As with the five elite journals, most of the nonelite journals experienced slight declines in prolific author content from 2000 to 2009 (Panel B) relative to 1990-2009 (Panel A). The largest of these declines was for the PBFJ (=4.5% =31.4% to 26.9%). Only seven of the journals experienced a decline of less than one percentage point, or an increase, in prolific author content (FAJ, JFM, FR, JEF, JCF, FM, and EFM). As prolific author content declined in the nonelite journals, most of these journals published more content by individuals who have never published an elite five article (Table VI, Column 4). For five journals, the percentage of appearances by authors who have not published an elite five article increased by more than five percentage points between Panel A and Panel B of Table VI (JD, JPM, PBFJ, JFU, and MF). The largest of these increases was for the PBFJ (=8.1% =67.3% to 59.2%). In only three journals (FM, FAJ, and JBF) did the percentage of journal content by authors who have never published an elite article decline from 1990 to 2009 to 2000 to 2009. These changes certainly are caused, in part, by the shifting population of active finance researchers, as the 2000-2009 population of appearances includes contributions by individuals who ultimately will be classified as prolific, but have yet to meet the benchmarks defined in this paper. However, these changes could also be due, in part, to the ever-increasing population of finance journals, which has spread prolific author content over a wider number of journal titles.

Perhaps the most interesting pieces of information in Table VI are the differences between the ranking of the nonelite journals when appearances in all 23 journals determine prolific authors and when appearances in just the elite five are used as the benchmark. When prolific authors are identified using appearances across all 23 journals, the JFR and the FR move into the top 10 surviving journals (in both Panels A and B), replacing the JACF and the JFI. When only appearances in the five elite journals are used to isolate prolific authors, the RF moves into the top 10 (replacing the FAJ in Panel A and tying the FAJ in Panel B). The JFR and the FR fall well outside the top 10 in Column 3 of both panels. Thus, the publication preferences of, or opportunities available to, prolific authors may depend upon whether an individual has published frequently in the elite five journals or across all 23 journals. Some of the traditional second tier journals, most notably JFR and FR, appear to have developed a clientele within a subset of authors who have published frequently in high-impact journals, but not necessarily in the five elite journals.

VII. Conclusions

Sometimes actions speak louder than words. In this spirit, one way to discern what prolific authors really think about various journals is to see where they publish. We use this approach to document how publishing preferences have changed over the past 40 years and to gain information about the current pecking order of finance journals.

Although this method of ranking journals is not perfect (e.g., it can shortchange journals that publish articles outside of mainstream finance such as the JBF and the JBFA), it can nevertheless yield useful insights. The results confirm that the JF, the JFE, the RFS, and the JFQA remain the most popular destinations for research produced by prolific finance authors. After these four surviving journals (i.e., excluding the JB), the results suggest that FM and the FAJ, along with the newer, specialty journals such as the JFM, the JCF, and the JFI, are gradually replacing older, general interest journals, such as the JFR and the FR, as the most likely second tier destination of articles by these authors.

It should also be noted that the pecking order of finance journals will continue to evolve with several promising new journals commencing operations in 2011 and 2012 including the Quarterly Journal of Finance (2011), the Review of Asset Pricing Studies (2011), Critical Finance Review (2012), and the Review of Corporate Finance Studies (2012). A cursory review of their editorial boards reveals that each of these journals has the potential to compete with outlets included in our set of 23 high-impact journals.

The results in this paper provide insights for the editors of these (or other) new journals. In particular, it is unlikely that a journal can succeed in the long term by simply giving preference to (or soliciting) submissions by established, prolific authors. Instead, the key to a journal's long-term success appears to lie in its ability to attract high-quality submissions from talented, junior faculty members, and to help these scholars mold the manuscripts into high-quality papers. The lessons aspiring researchers can learn through this rigorous process will no doubt contribute to their future success. Thus, the content of the best journals is dominated by prolific author contributions not only because established scholars will (voluntarily) submit their best papers to these journals, but also because the younger scholars who publish in these journals are highly likely to become prolific in the future.

Even though the population of finance journals has exploded over the past 40 years (and continues to expand), allowing countless financial research papers to be published, it is no small task to place a paper in a high-impact finance journal. Over 50% of the appearances in 15 of the journals in this study are by individuals with five or more appearances across the entire set of 23 journals, while over 40% of the appearances in 22 of the journals are from authors with five or more high-impact appearances. Whether this result is due to cronyism or quality, it does not leave many available pages for researchers just starting their careers or for those working at nonelite research universities.

Although research standards should necessarily be rigorous (especially at the most prestigious universities), even scholars who have successfully published in the elite finance journals cannot place every article in those journals. The results here suggest that second tier finance publications are not necessarily second rate. In some cases, due to the highly specialized nature of the topic, articles appearing in specialized second tier journals might be in one of the best outlets that would consider publishing a manuscript of that specific type. As the finance field and its subfields continue to evolve, this trend is likely to continue. Because the population of journals has expanded in many academic fields and because competition for journal slots is also fierce in accounting, economics, and other disciplines, the patterns identified in this paper are unlikely to be unique to the finance literature. Thus, university administrators, especially those at nonelite research universities, would be wise to evaluate the research productivity of faculty members (both in finance and in other disciplines) using both restrictive lists of elite journals and slightly broader sets of high-quality journals, and to continually update these lists over time as the journal population continues to expand and perceptions of journal quality shift. This insight could help (all) universities better evaluate the research records of candidates for promotion, tenure, or merit awards.
Appendix

Twenty-Three High-Impact Journals

This appendix lists the 23 journals included in this study, the
acronyms used to identify these journals in the text, and the
year of each journal's inaugural issue (in parentheses). The
journals are separated into three groups: 1) five elite journals,
2) nine "second tier" journals established before 1989, and 3)
nine second tier journals established during the 1990s. In each
category, the journals are listed by initial publication date.

Five elite journals
  Journal of Business                                  JB     (1922)
  Journal of Finance                                   JF     (1946)
  Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis       JFQA   (1966)
  Journal of Financial Economics                       JFE    (1974)
  Review of Financial Studies                          RFS    (1988)
Other high-impact journals established prior to 1990
  Financial Analysts Journal                           FAJ    (1945)
  Financial Review                                     FR     (1966)
  Financial Management                                 FM     (1972)
  Journal of Business Finance and Accounting           JBFA   (1974)
  Journal of Portfolio Management                      JPM    (1974)
  Journal of Banking and Finance                       JBF    (1977)
  Journal of Financial Research                        JFR    (1978)
  Journal of Futures Markets                           JFU    (1981)
  Journal of Applied Corporate Finance                 JACF   (1988)
Other high-impact journals established after 1990
  Journal of Financial Intermediation                  JFI    (1991)
  Mathematical Finance                                 MF     (1991)
  Journal of Empirical Finance                         JEF    (1993)
  Pacific Basin Finance Journal                        PBFJ   (1993)
  Journal of Derivatives                               JD     (1993)
  Journal of Corporate Finance                         JCF    (1994)
  European Financial Management                        EFM    (1997)
  Review of Finance                                    RF     (1997)
  Journal of Financial Markets                         JFM    (1998)


References

Alexander, J.C. and R.H. Mabry, 1994, "Relative Significance of Journals, Authors, and Articles Cited in Financial Research," Journal of Finance 49, 697-712.

Bauerlein, M., M. Gad-el-Hak, W. Grody, B. McKelvey, and S.W. Trimple, 2010, "We Must Stop the Avalanche of Low Quality Research," Chronicle of Higher Education 56, A80.

Borde, S.F., J.M. Cheney, and J. Madura, 1999, "A Note on Perceptions of Finance Journal Quality," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting 12, 89-96.

Borokhovich, K.A., R.J. Bricker, and B.J. Simkins, 2000, "An Analysis of Finance Journal Impact Factors," Journal of Finance 55, 1457-1469.

Borokhovich, K.A., A.A. Lee, and B.J. Simkins, 2011, "A Framework for Journal Assessment: The Case of the Journal of Banking and Finance," Journal of Banking and Finance 35, 1-6.

Chan, K.C., R. Fok, and M.-S. Pan, 2000, "Citation-Based Finance Journal Rankings: An Update," Financial Practice and Education 10, 132-141.

Chen, C.R. and Y. Huang, 2007, "Author Affiliation Index, Finance Journal Ranking, and the Pattern of Authorship f Journal of Corporate Finance 13, 1008-1026.

Coe, R.K. and I. Weinstock, 1983, "Evaluating the Finance Journals," Journal of Financial Research 6, 345-349.

Corbett, E.P.J., 1992, "The Shame of the Current Standards for Promotion and Tenure," Journal of Advanced Composition 12, 111-116.

Currie, R.R. and G.S. Pandher, 2011, "Finance Journal Rankings and Tiers: An Active Scholar Assessment Methodology," Journal of Banking & Finance 35, 7-20.

Danielson, M.G. and J.L. Heck, 2010, "Giving Credit Where Credit Is Due: Summary Analysis of the Most Prolific Authors in 15 High-Impact Accounting Journals," Advances in Accounting 26, 195-206.

Engemann, K.M. and H.J. Wall, 2009, "A Journal Ranking for the Ambitious Economist," Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review 91, 127-139.

Fishe, R.P.H., 1998, "What Are the Research Standards for Full Professor of Finance?" Journal of Finance 53, 1053-1079.

Griffiths, M.D. and D. Winters, 2005, "Inferring Promotion and Tenure Research Hurdles: What the Data Say," Journal of Financial Education 31, 1-16.

Heck, J.L. and P.L. Cooley, 2005, "Prolific Authors in the Finance Literature: A Half-Century of Contributions," Journal of Finance Literature 1, 40-62.

Keloharju, M., 2008, "What's New in Finance?" European Financial Management 14, 564-608.

Mabry, R.H. and A.D. Sharplin, 1985, "The Relative Importance of Journals Used in Finance Research," Journal of Financial Research 8, 287-296.

Oltheten, E., V. Theoharakis, and N.G. Travlos, 2005, "Faculty Perceptions and Readership Patterns of Finance Journals: A Global View," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 40, 223-239.

Tanner, G., 2000, "Referee Quality and Journal Characteristics," Financial Practice and Education 10, 123-131.

Weston, J.F., 1994, "A (Relatively) Brief History of Finance Ideas," Financial Practice and Education 4, 7-26.

Wilhite, A.W. and E.A. Fong, 2012, "Coercive Citation in Academic Publishing," Science 335, 542-543.

Zivney, T.L. and W. Reichenstein, 1994, "The Pecking Order in Finance Journals," Financial Practice and Education 4, 77-87.

The authors thank Raghu Rau (Editor) and an anonymous referee for their constructive comments and suggestions.

Morris G. Danielson and Jean L. Heck *

* Morris G. Danielson is an Associate Professor of Finance in the Haub School of Business at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia, PA. Jean L. Heck is an Associate Professor of Finance and the Brian Duperreault Chair for Risk Management and Insurance in the Haub School of Business at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia, PA.

(1) Danielson and Heck (2010) report that only 13.7% of the authors appearing (at least once) in the set of 15 high-impact accounting journals have five or more such appearances. However, these authors account for 51.1% of the appearances across all 15 journals.

(2) Bauerlein et al. (2010) find that the number of published articles across all academic disciplines continues to grow at a 3.26% annual rate. In finance, notable new titles established since 2005 include the Quarterly Journal of Finance (2011), Review of Asset Pricing Studies (2011), Critical Finance Review (2012), and Review of Corporate Finance Studies (2012).

(3) Zivney and Reichenstein (1994) report a similar list of the "next eight" dedicated finance journals. However, their list includes the Journal of Business Finance and Accounting (JBFA) and omits JACF.

(4) As an exception. Tanner (2000) evaluates journals using information about referee quality.

(5) For example, if we were to include journals from related fields (e.g., accounting or economics) in the set of next best finance journals, we might find that several second tier finance journals contain a greater percentage of prolific finance author content than do the elite journals from the related fields. If so, this result would probably say more about the quantity of finance content in the nonfinance journals than about the quality of such content (i.e., the content of elite economics journals is likely dominated by contributions from prolific economists and the content of the elite accounting journals is likely dominated by contributions from prolific accounting researchers, limiting the number of finance pages these journals can publish).

(6) Due to the volume of economics research in JMCB, JIMF, JME, and JBF, these journals are included in some economics journal ranking studies, such as Engemann and Wall (2009), who ranked journals based upon the (adjusted) number of times a journal was cited in seven leading general interest economics journals. JBF ranks lower in the Engemann and Wall (2009) study than do JME, JMCB, and JIMF. Combined with the results in Alexander and Mabry (1994), these results suggest that the historical content of JBF has been skewed more toward finance, whereas the content of JME, JMCB, and JIMF has been skewed more toward economics.

(7) In 2004, the European Financial Review was renamed Review of Finance. This journal is listed using its old name in the Oltheten et al. (2005) study and is listed as Review of Finance here. However, we include all publications in this journal from its inception as the European Finance Review in 1997 (through 2009) in the data set.

(8) Most articles published in the finance literature in recent decades, including articles written by successful researchers from premier institutions, have two or more authors. Indeed, Fishe (1998) finds that almost 80% of the publications by full and associate professors at the top 90 research universities are coauthored. In tables summarizing the overall research records of these individuals, Fishe (1998) reports total article counts, rather than adjusting appearances for the number of coauthors, presumably because of the importance of a candidate's total number of publications in promotion and tenure decisions. We acknowledge that using unadjusted appearances decreases the weighting of sole authored papers in our study. To the extent that prolific authors are more likely than other researchers to publish sole authored work, this method could cause the calculated percentage of journal content attributed to prolific authors to be slightly understated.

(9) We also analyzed the publication records of two additional sets of prolific authors: 1) those with 10 or more publications in the five elite journals and 2) those with 10 or more publications in the 23 high-impact journals. These results corroborate the information reported in this paper.

(10) Graduation year data were obtained from the Ohio State University Worldwide Directory of Finance Faculty (http://fisher.osu.edu/fin/findir), the ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database, the Prentice Hall 2004-2005 Finance Faculty directory, and Internet searches for individual author resumes. Although graduation dates are, on average, approximately two years earlier than the year of an individual's first publication in these journals, the two dates list authors in much the same order. The correlation between graduation dates and first publication years is almost 0.95 within the population of authors with five or more elite appearances, and just under 0.90 within the larger set of individuals with five or more appearances across all 23 journals.

(11) Prior to 1990, the JBF published four issues per year. The JBF then published six issues in each year from 1990 to 1994, eight in 1995, 10 in 1996, and 12 in 1997 and all subsequent years. The JPM continues to publish four issues a year (as it has since its inception). Thus, fluctuations in the number of appearances in this journal are due to year-to-year changes in the number of articles published and the number of coauthors per paper. The JFU published four issues each year until 1986, six issues each year from 1987 to 1992, eight issues from 1993 to 1999, 10 in 2000, and 12 in 2001 and all subsequent years.

(12) For example, MF has averaged almost 108 (=538/5) appearances every two years since 2000, compared to a previous high of 72 in 1998-1999. However, MF continues to publish four issues a year, as it has since its inception. JEF (1999), JCF (2003), PBFJ (1997), and EFM (2005) all increased their annual production schedule from four issues to five issues in the year listed in parentheses.
Table I. Distribution of Appearances Across All 23 Journals and the
Five Elite Journals: 1970-2009

This table tabulates the cumulative distribution of appearances
by authors across all 23 high-impact journals and across the five
elite journals. The journals included in these populations are
listed in the Appendix. The rows of the table list information
for authors who accumulated total appearances, from 1970 to 2009
in the specified subset of journals, ranging from one or more
appearance (1+) to 10 or more appearances (10+). Each row lists
the total number (and percentage) of authors reaching the
specified productivity benchmark, and the number (and percentage)
of appearances attributed to these authors. For example, the 1+
row reveals that 15,868 (5,840) authors appeared at least once in
the set of 23 journals (five elite journals) from 1970 to 2009,
and these authors have a total of 47,141 (16,109) appearances in
the set of 23 journals (five elite journals) from 1970 to 2009.
The 10+ row indicates that across all 23 journals, only 6.08%
(= 964/15,868) of those authors appearing at least once in the
journals accumulated 10+ appearances in these journals,
while for the five elite journals only 4.97% (=290/5,840) of
those individuals with at least one appearance in those five
journals accumulated 10+ such appearances.

                         All 23 Journals

       Authors   Percent of Authors   Appearances   Percent of
                                                    Appearances

10+      964            6.08%           17,122         36.32%
9+      1,137           7.17%           18,516         39.28%
8+      1,356           8.55%           20,268         42.99%
7+      1,625          10.24%           22,151         46.99%
6+      2,001          12.61%           24,407         51.77%
5+      2,499          15.75%           26,363         55.92%
4+      3,219          20.29%           29,777         63.17%
3+      4,401          27.74%           33,323         70.69%
2+      6,752          42.55%           38,025         80.66%
1+     15,868         100.00%           47,141        100.00%

                     Five Elite Journals

       Authors   Percent of Authors   Appearances   Percent of
                                                    Appearances

10+      290            4.97%            4,610         28.62%
9+       354            6.06%            5,175         32.12%
8+       433            7.41%            5,807         36.05%
7+       548            9.38%            6,612         41.05%
6+       707           12.11%            7,566         46.97%
5+       904           15.48%            8,529         52.95%
4+      1,171          20.05%            9,619         59.71%
3+      1,633          27.96%           11,005         68.32%
2+      2,530          43.32%           12,799         79.45%
1+      5,840         100.00%           16,109        100.00%

Table II. Appearances in Individual Journal by Prolific Authors:
1970-2009

This table lists the number and percentage of 1970/2009
appearances in 23 journals by authors who have: 1) five or more
appearances across all 23 journals, 2) five or more appearances
in the five elite journals, and 3) no appearances in the five
elite journals. The table also lists summary information for all
23 journals, the five elite journals, the nonelite journals
beginning prior to 1990, and the nonelite journals beginning in
1990 or thereafter. For example, 52.8% (= 1,679/3,177) of the
appearances in the Financial Analysts Journal are by authors with
five or more appearances in all 23 journals, 18.3% (= 581/3,177)
are by individuals with five or more appearances in the five
elite journals, and 57.5% (=1,827/3,177) are by authors with no
appearances in the five elite journals.

                               All Appearances in     Appearances by
                                  this Journal      Authors with 5+ in
                                                     All 23 Journals

All 23 journals                      47,141               26,363
Elite journals
  Journal of Business                1,984                 1022
  Journal of Finance                 6,199                4,257
  Journal of Financial               2,794                1,894
    and Quantitative
    Analysis
  Journal of Financial               3,241                2,387
    Economics
  Review of Financial                1,891                1,337
    Studies
Total                                16,109               10,897
Other journals (pre-1990)
  Financial Analysts                 3,177                1,679
    Journal
  Financial Review                   1,976                 677
  Financial Management               2,245                1,391
  Journal of Business                3,300                1,356
    Finance and
    Accounting
  Journal of Portfolio               2,844                1,500
    Management
  Journal of Banking                 5,206                2,521
  and Finance
  Journal of Financial               1,852                1,198
  Research
  Journal of Futures Markets         2,591                1,363
  Journal of Applied                 1,350                 730
    Corporate Finance
Total                                24,541               12,415
Other journals (1990 and
  after)
  Journal of Financial                602                  324
    Intermediation
  Mathematical Finance                840                  258
  Journal of Empirical                900                  378
    Finance
  Pacific Basin Finance              1,039                 499
    Journal
  Journal of Derivatives              607                  291
  Journal of Corporate                849                  469
    Finance
  European Financial                  759                  349
    Management
  Review of Finance                   447                  218
  Journal of Financial                448                  265
    Markets
Total                                6,491                3,051

                               % by Authors with      Appearances by
                               5+ Appearances in     Authors with 5+
                                     All 23           in Five Elite
                                                         Journals

All 23 journals                      55.9%                13,593
Elite journals
  Journal of Business                51.5%                 720
  Journal of Finance                 68.7%                3,416
  Journal of Financial               67.8%                1,279
    and Quantitative
    Analysis
  Journal of Financial               73.7%                1,979
    Economics
  Review of Financial                70.7%                1,135
    Studies
Total                                67.6%                8,529
Other journals (pre-1990)
  Financial Analysts                 52.8%                 581
    Journal
  Financial Review                   34.3%                 236
  Financial Management               62.0%                 588
  Journal of Business                41.1%                 145
    Finance and
    Accounting
  Journal of Portfolio               52.7%                 511
    Management
  Journal of Banking                 48 4%                 827
  and Finance
  Journal of Financial               64.7%                 330
  Research
  Journal of Futures Markets         52.6%                 223
  Journal of Applied                 54.1%                 420
    Corporate Finance
Total                                50.6%                3,861
Other journals (1990 and
  after)
  Journal of Financial               53.8%                 170
    Intermediation
  Mathematical Finance               30.7%                  67
  Journal of Empirical               42.0%                 131
    Finance
  Pacific Basin Finance              48.0%                 153
    Journal
  Journal of Derivatives             47.9%                 115
  Journal of Corporate               55.2%                 205
    Finance
  European Financial                 46.0%                 122
    Management
  Review of Finance                  48.8%                 102
  Journal of Financial               59.2%                 138
    Markets
Total                                47.0%                1,203

                               % by Authors with      Appearances by
                               54+ Appearances in    Authors with No
                                   Five Elite         Appearances in
                                                        Five Elite

All 23 journals                      28.8%                17,247
Elite journals
  Journal of Business                36.3%                  0
  Journal of Finance                 55.1%                  0
  Journal of Financial               45.8%                  0
    and Quantitative
    Analysis
  Journal of Financial               61.1%                  0
    Economics
  Review of Financial                60.0%                  0
    Studies
Total                                52.9%                  0
Other journals (pre-1990)
  Financial Analysts                 18.3%                1,827
    Journal
  Financial Review                   11.9%                 971
  Financial Management               26.2%                 844
  Journal of Business                 4.4%                2,436
    Finance and
    Accounting
  Journal of Portfolio               18.0%                1,749
    Management
  Journal of Banking                 15 9%                2 886
  and Finance
  Journal of Financial               17.8%                 779
  Research
  Journal of Futures Markets          8.6%                1,632
  Journal of Applied                 31.1%                 684
    Corporate Finance
Total                                15.7%                13,808
Other journals (1990 and
  after)
  Journal of Financial               28.2%                 209
    Intermediation
  Mathematical Finance                8.0%                 617
  Journal of Empirical               14.6%                 516
    Finance
  Pacific Basin Finance              14.7%                 615
    Journal
  Journal of Derivatives             18.9%                 351
  Journal of Corporate               24.1%                 344
    Finance
  European Financial                 16.1%                 462
    Management
  Review of Finance                  22.8%                 185
  Journal of Financial               30.8%                 140
    Markets
Total                                18.5%                3,439

                               % by Authors with
                               No Appearances in
                                   Five Elite

All 23 journals                      36.6%
Elite journals
  Journal of Business                 0.0%
  Journal of Finance                  0.0%
  Journal of Financial                0.0%
    and Quantitative
    Analysis
  Journal of Financial                0.0%
    Economics
  Review of Financial                 0.0%
    Studies
Total                                 0.0%
Other journals (pre-1990)
  Financial Analysts                 57.5%
    Journal
  Financial Review                   49.1%
  Financial Management               37.6%
  Journal of Business                73.8%
    Finance and
    Accounting
  Journal of Portfolio               61.5%
    Management
  Journal of Banking                   4%
  and Finance
  Journal of Financial               42.1%
  Research
  Journal of Futures Markets         63.0%
  Journal of Applied                 50.7%
    Corporate Finance
Total                                56.3%
Other journals (1990 and
  after)
  Journal of Financial               34.7%
    Intermediation
  Mathematical Finance               73.5%
  Journal of Empirical               57.3%
    Finance
  Pacific Basin Finance              59.2%
    Journal
  Journal of Derivatives             57.8%
  Journal of Corporate               40.5%
    Finance
  European Financial                 60.9%
    Management
  Review of Finance                  41.4%
  Journal of Financial               31.3%
    Markets
Total                                53.0%

Table III. Changing Publication Patterns: 1970-2009 (Five Elite
Journals)

This table documents the evolution of prolific author content in
each of the five elite journals from 1970 to 2009. The table
reports on the publication activity of prolific authors within 12
subperiods: 1970-1979, 2000-2009, and 10 two-year periods from
1980 to 1999. Panel A lists the total number of appearances in
each of the five elite journals (and the total appearances in all
23 journals) in the 12 subperiods. Panels B and C analyze
publication activity by authors with five or more appearances in
the set of all 23, and by individuals with five or more
appearances in the five elite journals, respectively. For each
subperiod, Panels B and C list, for each journal and for the 23
journals in total, the percentage of appearances by the defined
set of prolific authors and (in parentheses) the average
graduation date for these individuals. The classification of
individuals into the author populations analyzed in Panels B and
C was based on publication information across the entire 1970-
2009 period.

             All 23 Journals         JB               JF

Panel A. Total Appearances by Journal and by Subperiod

1970-1979         4,654             458             1,298
1980-1981         1,392              79              288
1982-1983         1,576              81              338
1984-1985         1,662              93              349
1986-1987         1,772             112              274
1988-1989         1,985              74              272
1990-1991         2,268              99              312
1992-1993         2,530              89              314
1994-1995         2,713              80              280
1996-1997         3,021              72              290
1998-1999         3,078              73              322
2000-2009        20,483             674             1,862
Total            47,134            1,984            6,199

Panel B. Five or More Appearances in All 23 Journals

1970-1979    49.6% (1970.1)    36.0% (1968.8)   56.5% (1969.7)
1980-1981    57.0% (1973.4)    35.4% (1974.0)   63.9% (1973.4)
1982-1983    62.7% (1975.0)    37.0% (1975.2)   69.2% (1974.0)
1984-1985    65.9% (1976.0)    49.5% (1976.0)   73.1% (1975.3)

Panel B. Five or More Appearances in All 23 Journals

1986-1987    67.8% (1977.6)    48.2% (1975.6)   79.9% (1978.2)
1988-1989    66.1% (1978.9)    58.1% (1980.7)   71.7% (1979.4)
1990-1991    64.1% (1980.4)    63.6% (1979.5)   77.5% (1980.7)
1992-1993    65.1% (1981.9)    56.2% (1980.9)   80.3% (1983.3)
1994-1995    64.8% (1986.1)    71.3% (1984.4)   78.6% (1984.5)
1996-1997    63.0% (1984.8)    61.1% (1983.4)   81.4% (1986.1)
1998-1999    60.0% (1986.0)    47.9% (1983.9)   77.0% (1987.6)
2000-2009    51.6% (1992.5)    61.0% (1989.9)   68.7% (1991.0)

Panel C. Five or More Appearances in Five Elite Journals

1970-1979    32.3% (1969.5)    28.4% (1967.9)   43.7% (1969.1)
1980-1981    31.0% (1972.6)    27.8% (1973.2)   48.6% (1972.9)
1982-1983    35.1% (1974.3)    33.3% (1974.9)   56.2% (1973.9)
1984-1985    38.1% (1975.2)    38.7% (1976.0)   61.9% (1975.0)
1986-1987    36.4% (1976.8)    42.0% (1975.7)   64.5% (1977.7)
1988-1989    34.6% (1977.9)    43.2% (1979.8)   54.8% (1978.8)
1990-1991    32.8% (1979.5)    46.4% (1979.0)   62.8% (1979.9)
1992-1993    30.7% (1981.0)    46.5% (1981.0)   63.6% (1982.8)
1994-1995    31.5% (1982.3)    48.7% (1983.6)   65.3% (1986.3)
1996-1997    30.2% (1983.3)    47.2% (1982.2)   68.9% (1985.6)
1998-1999    29.3% (1984.5)    35.6% (1983.5)   63.3% (1987.2)
2000-2009    24.3% (1987.9)    40.2% (1988.8)   55.5% (1990.3)

                  JFQA             JFE              RFS

Panel A. Total Appearances by Journal and by Subperiod

1970-1979         785              164
1980-1981         176               54               --
1982-1983         146              101               --
1984-1985         111               94               --
1986-1987         110              142               --
1988-1989         120              172               76
1990-1991         122              141              105
1992-1993         129              117              108
1994-1995         134              131              117
1996-1997         105              202              147
1998-1999          98              215              122
2000-2009         758             1,707            1,215
Total            2,794            3,240            1,890

Panel B. Five or More Appearances in All 23 Journals

1970-1979    58.9% (1970.0)   84.1% (1971.4)
1980-1981    71.6% (1973.4)   83.3% (1975.8)
1982-1983    70.5% (1975.5)   85.1% (1976.9)
1984-1985    74.8% (1976.8)   89.4% (1977.4)

Panel B. Five or More Appearances in All 23 Journals

1986-1987    80.0% (1978.0)   83.2% (1979.4)
1988-1989    77.5% (1979.8)   87.8% (1980.5)   81.6% (1981.2)
1990-1991    78.6% (1981.8)   80.1% (1982.7)   84.8% (1982.9)
1992-1993    76.7% (1982.8)   78.6% (1983.6)   78.7% (1983.0)
1994-1995    70.1% (1986.7)   81.7% (1984.8)   82.9% (1985.0)
1996-1997    70.5% (1986.4)   80.2% (1985.4)   82.3% (1985.9)
1998-1999    73.5% (1985.7)   80.0% (1987.4)   77.0% (1987.8)
2000-2009    69.3% (1990.2)   69.0% (1991.5)   68.9% (1992.1)

Panel C. Five or More Appearances in Five Elite Journals

1970-1979    42.7% (1969.3)   78.7% (1971.6)
1980-1981    48.3% (1972.7)   75.9% (1975.5)
1982-1983    47.9% (1975.1)   74.3% (1976.8)
1984-1985    57.7% (1975.7)   86.2% (1979.3)
1986-1987    59.1% (1977.2)   72.7% (1979.1)
1988-1989    53.3% (1979.0)   78.5% (1980.0)   75.3% (1981.2)
1990-1991    51.6% (1981.0)   65.2% (1982.2)   80.0% (1982.9)
1992-1993    51.1% (1982.0)   65.8% (1983.2)   72.2% (1982.6)
1994-1995    48.5% (1984.7)   71.7% (1985.2)   72.6% (1982.3)
1996-1997    47.6% (1985.3)   66.3% (1984.4)   68.7% (1985.3)
1998-1999    41.8% (1984.5)   62.7% (1986.5)   61.4% (1987.1)
2000-2009    42.1% (1988.3)   54.2% (1990.5)   57.0% (1991.4)

Table IV. Changing Publication Patterns: 1980-2009 (Pre-1990
Second Tier Journals)

This table documents the evolution of prolific author content in
each of the nine second tier journals that began operation prior
to 1990. The table reports on the publication activity of
prolific authors within 12 subperiods: 1970-1979, 2000-2009, and
10 two-year periods from 1980 to 1999. Panel A lists the total
number of appearances in each of the journals (and the total
appearances in all 23 journals) in the 12 subperiods. Panels B
and C analyze publication activity by authors with five or more
appearances in the set of all 23, and by individuals with five or
more appearances in the five elite journals, respectively. For
each subperiod, Panels B and C list, for each journal and for the
23 journals in total, the percentage of appearances by the
defined set of prolific authors and (in parentheses) the average
graduation date for these individuals. The classification of
individuals into the author populations analyzed in Panels B and
C was based on publication information across the entire 1970-
2009 period.

             All 23 Journals        FAJ               FR

Panel A. Total Appearances by Journal and by Subperiod

1970-1979         4,654             670              141
1980-1981         1,392             100               64
1982-1983         1,576             137               77
1984-1985         1,662             170               98
1986-1987         1,772             183              125
1988-1989         1,985             172              142
1990-1991         2,268             175              147
1992-1993         2,530             216              118
1994-1995         2,713             179              134
1996-1997         3,021             196              158
1998-1999         3,078             190              171
2000-2009        20,483             782              601
Total            47,134            3,170            1,976

Panel B. Five or More Appearances in All 23 Journals

1970-1979    50.0% (1970.1)    34.0% (1967.9)   50.4% (1971.5)
1980-1981    57.0% (1973.4)    39.4% (1970.9)   62.5% (1973.8)
1982-1983    62.7% (1975.0)    57.4% (1973.9)   63.6% (1974.1)
1984-1985    65.9% (1976.0)    58.7% (1974.6)   76.5% (1976.4)
1986-1987    67.8% (1977.6)    64.7% (1976.4)   66.4% (1977.1)
1988-1989    66.1% (1978.9)    65.3% (1977.5)   63.3% (1979.8)
1990-1991    64.1% (1980.4)    57.1% (1976.7)   57.8% (1979.7)
1992-1993    65.1% (1981.9)    60.3% (1977.6)   59.3% (1982.2)
1994-1995    64.8% (1983.2)    60.9% (1980.6)   55.2% (1981.7)
1996-1997    63.0% (1984.8)    56.3% (1985.2)   55.7% (1983.8)
1998-1999    60.0% (1986.0)    58.1% (1981.8)   60.2% (1986.4)
2000-2009    51.6% (1989.7)    59.0% (1984.9)   56.1% (1988.7)

Panel C. Five or More Appearances in Five Elite Journals

1970-1979    32.3% (1969.5)    11.9% (1967.8)   14.9% (1972.1)
1980-1981    31.0% (1972.6)    10.2% (1966.9)   17.2% (1971.8)
1982-1983    35.1% (1974.3)    22.1% (1971.0)   23.4% (1974.1)
1984-1985    38.1% (1975.2)    22.7% (1974.6)   28.6% (1975.5)
1986-1987    36.4% (1976.8)    21.7% (1977.8)   17.6% (1974.1)
1988-1989    34.6% (1977.9)    16.8% (1972.0)   17.6% (1976.6)
1990-1991    32.8% (1979.5)    20.3% (1973.3)   13.6% (1979.1)
1992-1993    30.7% (1981.0)    19.8% (1974.7)   8.4% (1977.6)
1994-1995    31.5% (1982.3)    19.8% (1978.7)   8.4% (1976.8)
1996-1997    30.2% (1983.3)    21.3% (1984.6)   9.4% (1982.4)
1998-1999    29.3% (1984.5)    25.1% (1980.7)   7.0% (1980.9)
2000-2009    24.3% (1987.9)    22.1% (1982.1)   8.1% (1982.1)

                   FM              JBFA              JPM

Panel A. Total Appearances by Journal and by Subperiod

1970-1979         434              259               301
1980-1981         141              127               151
1982-1983         125              118               147
1984-1985         116              135               124
1986-1987         131              138               148
1988-1989         118              160               167
1990-1991         130              196               156
1992-1993         169              238               153
1994-1995         109              277               156
1996-1997         110              295               168
1998-1999         132              201               160
2000-2009         530             1,156             1,013
Total            2,245            3,300             2,844

Panel B. Five or More Appearances in All 23 Journals

1970-1979    51.6% (1970.3)   32.8% (1975.4)   42.1% (1970.0)
1980-1981    58.2% (1972.3)   38.6% (1976.1)   54.0% (1972.2)
1982-1983    61.6% (1974.3)   48.3% (1976.8)   64.2% (1974.9)
1984-1985    71.6% (1975.8)   44.4% (1976.9)   63.7% (1973.8)
1986-1987    65.6% (1976.6)   49.3% (1978.2)   66.9% (1975.6)
1988-1989    55.1% (1977.4)   43.8% (1979.8)   61.4% (1975.5)
1990-1991    65.3% (1981.2)   44.9% (1981.2)   57.1% (1976.9)
1992-1993    69.2% (1981.6)   53.8% (1983.4)   52.6% (1979.1)
1994-1995    61.5% (1982.7)   46.9% (1984.6)   64.1% (1978.3)
1996-1997    68.2% (1983.4)   46.1% (1983.1)   55.7% (1980.6)
1998-1999    67.4% (1985.9)   59.4% (1987.9)   59.4% (1982.3)
2000-2009    65.0% (1990.3)   35.9% (1990.4)   46.0% (1984.6)

Panel C. Five or More Appearances in Five Elite Journals

1970-1979    25.3% (1969.8)   8.9% (1974.3)    19.2% (1970.5)
1980-1981    22.0% (1970.5)   10.2% (1973.7)   21.1% (1970.8)
1982-1983    24.0% (1972.5)   5.9% (1972.4)    23.5% (1973.3)
1984-1985    24.1% (1972.4)   9.6% (1975.5)    30.6% (1972.3)
1986-1987    32.1% (1974.5)   8.9% (1976.7)    27.7% (1974.9)
1988-1989    24.6% (1975.2)   7.5% (1977.6)     25.3% 1972.8)
1990-1991    29.2% (1979.4)   3.5% (1979.1)    18.5% (1973.7)
1992-1993    29.5% (1979.6)   5.0% (1978.2)    14.4% (1974.7)
1994-1995    29.5% (1980.3)   5.0% (1986.5)    14.4% (1975.1)
1996-1997    26.3% (1977.1)   3.3% (1986.1)    14.9% (1976.2)
1998-1999    27.2% (1982.9)   3.9% (1984.2)    21.2% (1976.7)
2000-2009    26.8% (1986.6)   2.2% (1982.2)    1 1.7% (1976.6)

                  JBF              JFR              JFU

Panel A. Total Appearances by Journal and by Subperiod

1970-1979         104               39               --
1980-1981          82               86               44
1982-1983         107              102               97
1984-1985         112              120              139
1986-1987         124              122              161
1988-1989         156              121              156
1990-1991         233              122              191
1992-1993         258              118              202
1994-1995         294              140              175
1996-1997         330              137              183
1998-1999         283              124              183
2000-2009        3,124             621             1,061
Total            5,207            1,852            2,592

Panel B. Five or More Appearances in All 23 Journals

1970-1979    58.7% (1970.1)   74.4% (1972.9)         --
1980-1981    59.8% (1973.0)   66.7% (1974.5)   31.8% (1978.0)
1982-1983    50.5% (1974.3)   66.7% (1975.4)   58.2% (1973.4)
1984-1985    58.0% (1975.5)   72.5% (1977.1)   56.5% (1977.1)
1986-1987    66.9% (1976.8)   69.7% (1978.5)   61.5% (1979.1)
1988-1989    66.7% (1978.2)   76.9% (1979.0)   57.7% (1978.3)
1990-1991    63.3% (1979.9)   72.9% (1981.1)   53.4% (1981.4)
1992-1993    60.1% (1981.2)   76.3% (1982.8)   58.4% (1983.6)
1994-1995    67.3% (1982.4)   67.9% (1983.1)   58.9% (1985.3)
1996-1997    63.6% (1980.8)   62.0% (1987.2)   62.8% (1986.1)
1998-1999    57.2% (1984.3)   52.4% (1987.7)   48.6% (1987.3)
2000-2009    41.8% (1989.2)   57.5% (1988.7)   48.6% (1991.4)

Panel C. Five or More Appearances in Five Elite Journals

1970-1979    33.7% (1969.3)   35.9% (1972.1)         --
1980-1981    26.9% (1971.0)   24.4% (1972.9)   6.8% (1970.0.)
1982-1983    26.2% (1972.0)   24.5% (1974.6)   17.6% (1978.3)
1984-1985    33.9% (1974.1)   23.3% (1976.2)   18.1% (1976.6)
1986-1987    39.5% (1976.1)   20.5% (1977.7)   13.7% (1977.1)
1988-1989    25.6% (1974.9)   30.6% (1977.2)   9.0% (1977.0)
1990-1991    25.4% (1978.0)   19.6% (1978.5)   7.3% (1978.1)
1992-1993    17.0% (1978.6)   17.7% (1981.6)   9.4% (1982.3)
1994-1995    17.0% (1978.6)   17.7% (1979.2)   9.4% (1984.4)
1996-1997    21.8% (1984.0)   15.3% (1984.7)   10.3% (1984.4)
1998-1999    21.9% (1983.4)   8.8% (1981.0)    6.0% (1982.6)
2000-2009    10.2% (1984.3)   12.7% (1983.4)   6.2% (1984.0)

                  JACF

Panel A. Total Appearances by Journal and by Subperiod

1970-1979          --
1980-1981          --
1982-1983          --
1984-1985          --
1986-1987          --
1988-1989          78
1990-1991          82
1992-1993         121
1994-1995         139
1996-1997         145
1998-1999         136
2000-2009         649
Total            1,350

Panel B. Five or More Appearances in All 23 Journals

1970-1979          --
1980-1981          --
1982-1983          --
1984-1985          --
1986-1987          --
1988-1989    52.6% (1977.7)
1990-1991    51.2% (1976.5)
1992-1993    66.9% (1979.8)
1994-1995    61.9% (1979.9)
1996-1997    56.6% (1981.7)
1998-1999    55.1% (1982.6)
2000-2009    49.2% (1983.9)

Panel C. Five or More Appearances in Five Elite Journals

1970-1979          --
1980-1981          --
1982-1983          --
1984-1985          --
1986-1987          --
1988-1989    25.6% (1972.3)
1990-1991    29.2% (1974.4)
1992-1993    32.7% (1976.3)
1994-1995    32.7% (1978.0)
1996-1997    34.4% (1980.5)
1998-1999    32.3% (1980.7)
2000-2009    29.4% (1981.7)

Table V. Changing Publication Patterns: 1990-2009 (Post-1990
Journals)

This table documents the evolution of prolific author content in
each of the nine second tier journals that began operation after
1990. The table reports on the publication activity of prolific
authors within six subperiods: 2000-2009 and five two-year
periods from 1990 to 1999. Panel A provides the total number of
appearances in each of the journals (and the total appearances in
all 23 journals) in the six subperiods. Panels B and C analyze
publication activity by authors with five or more appearances in
the set of all 23, and by individuals with five or more
appearances in the five elite journals, respectively. For each
subperiod, Panels B and C list, for each journal and for the 23
journals in total, the percentage of appearances by the defined
set of prolific authors and (in parentheses) the average
graduation date for these individuals. The classification of
individuals into the author populations analyzed in Panels B and
C was based on publication information across the entire 1970-
2009 period.

             All 23 Journals        JFI               MF

Panel A. Total Appearances by Journal and by Subperiod

1990-1991         2,268              26               30
1992-1993         2,530              42               65
1994-1995         2,713              39               65
1996-1997         3,021              46               70
1998-1999         3,078              54               72
2000-2009        20,483             395              538
Total            34,093             602              840

Panel B. Five or More Appearances in All 23 Journals

1990-1991    64.1% (1980.4)    57.7% (1982.1)   26.7% (1978.5)
1992-1993    65.1% (1981.9)    54.8% (1983.2)   43.1% (1980.9)
1994-1995    64.8% (1983.2)    61.5% (1986.5)   46.2% (1981.6)
1996-1997    63.0% (1984.8)    65.2% (1987.0)   31.4% (1988.4)
1998-1999    60.0% (1986.0)    68.5% (1986.6)   45.8% (1985.6)
2000-2009    51.6% (1989.7)    51.5% (1990.3)   26.3% (1988.3)

Panel C. Five or More Appearances in Five Elite Journals

1990-1991    32.8% (1979.5)    30.7% (1981.4)   16.6% (1982.7)
1992-1993    30.7% (1981.0)    40.4% (1983.4)   23.4% (1982.2)
1994-1995    31.5% (1982.3)    33.3% (1985.8)   16.9% (1982.5)
1996-1997    30.2% (1983.3)    41.3% (1986.8)   8.5% (1986.7)
1998-1999    29.3% (1984.5)    35.1% (1986.2)   5.5% (1984.2)
2000-2009    24.3% (1987.9)    26.1% (1987.5)   4.8% (1983.0)

                  JEF              PBFJ              JD

Panel A. Total Appearances by Journal and by Subperiod

1990-1991          --               --               --
1992-1993          19               43               11
1994-1995          43              103               41
1996-1997          62              108               73
1998-1999          87              102              100
2000-2009         689              683              382
Total             900             1,039             607

Panel B. Five or More Appearances in All 23 Journals

1990-1991          --               --               --
1992-1993    78.9% (1981.4)   58.1% (1979.4)   81.8% (1982.7)
1994-1995    39.5% (1988.1)   70.9% (1984.2)   68.3% (1980.3)
1996-1997    53.2% (1984.5)   61.1% (1983.5)   54.8% (1985.8)
1998-1999    40.2% (1987.3)   52.0% (1986.8)   49.0% (1988.3)
2000-2009    42.9% (1990.4)   44.2% (1989.4)   43.8% (1987.2)

Panel C. Five or More Appearances in Five Elite Journals

1990-1991          --               --               --
1992-1993    57.8% (1981.3)   25.5% (1975.5)   54.5% (1982.2)
1994-1995    13.9% (1988.0)   31.0% (1981.9)   39.0% (1976.3)
1996-1997    22.5% (1982.9)   25.0% (1977.3)   23.2% (1984.2)
1998-1999    16.0% (1983.1)   22.5% (1982.5)   17.0% (1985.1)
2000-2009    13.1% (1988.1)   9.5% (1981.0)    15.2% (1980.5)

                  JCF              EFM               RF

Panel A. Total Appearances by Journal and by Subperiod

1990-1991          --               --               --
1992-1993          --               --               --
1994-1995          46               31               --
1996-1997          45               58               21
1998-1999          62               72               62
2000-2009         696              598              364
Total             849              759              447

Panel B. Five or More Appearances in All 23 Journals

1990-1991          --               --               --
1992-1993          --               --               --
1994-1995    65.2% (1983.7)   64.5% (1984.2)         --
1996-1997    66.7% (1984.4)   62.1% (1986.8)   66.7% (1985.9)
1998-1999    56.5% (1988.1)   48.6% (1982.3)   58.1% (1983.4)
2000-2009    56.5% (1990.2)   45.0% (1989.4)   47.9% (1990.2)

Panel C. Five or More Appearances in Five Elite Journals

1990-1991          --               --               --
1992-1993          --               --               --
1994-1995    47.8% (1983.1)   35.4% (1981.8)         --
1996-1997    35.5% (1984.3)   13.7% (1977.6)   23.8% (1980.0)
1998-1999    27.4% (1987.9)   25.0% (1978.0)   38.7% (1981.5)
2000-2009    22.1% (1986.1)   15.5% (1984.0)   20.9% (1986.4)

                  JFM

Panel A. Total Appearances by Journal and by Subperiod

1990-1991          --
1992-1993          --
1994-1995          --
1996-1997          --
1998-1999          56
2000-2009         392
Total             448

Panel B. Five or More Appearances in All 23 Journals

1990-1991          --
1992-1993          --
1994-1995          --
1996-1997          --
1998-1999    64.3% (1987.4)
2000-2009    60.0% (1990.2)

Panel C. Five or More Appearances in Five Elite Journals

1990-1991          --
1992-1993          --
1994-1995          --
1996-1997          --
1998-1999    39.2% (1986.6)
2000-2009    30.9% (1988.0)

Table VI. The Current Pecking Order of Finance Journals

This table presents the current ranking of journals based on the
percentage of journal content by prolific authors, where prolific
authors are identified based upon appearances accumulated over
1970-2009. Panel A analyzes journal content during the most
recent 20-year period (1990-2009), while Panel B reports on the
most recent 10-year period (2000-2009). In each panel, Column 2
ranks journals based on appearances by authors having five or
more appearances in all 23 journals. Column 3 ranks journals
using appearances by authors with five or more appearances in the
five elite journals. Column 1 ranks journals using a simple
weighted-average of the appearance percentages in Columns 2 and
3. For example, the weighted-average appearances by prolific
authors in the Review of Financial Studies in Panel A is 64.8% (=
[70.2% + 59.4%]/2). Not all of the percentages in Column 1 can be
recalculated exactly from the appearance information in Columns
2 and 3, as listed here, due to rounding. In each panel, the
journals are listed based upon the ranking in this column. The
table also lists the percentage of journal content by authors
with no appearances in the five elite journals (Column 4), but
does not rank the journals on this basis.

                                          Column 1

                                           Weighted-
                                            Average
                                         Appearances by
                                        Prolific Authors

                                          %         Rank

Panel A. Appearances in Individual Journal by Prolific Authors:
1990-2009

Journal of Finance                      65.2%        1
Review of Financial Studies             64.8%        2
Journal of Financial Economics          63.3%        3
Journal of Financial and                57.1%        4
  Quantitative Analysis
Journal of Business                     49.6%        5
Financial Management                    46.4%        6
Journal of Financial Markets            45.0%        7
Journal of Applied Corporate Finance    42.8%        8
Journal of Financial Intermediation     41.0%        9
Journal of Corporate Finance            39.7%        10
Financial Analysts Journal              39.0%        11
Journal of Financial Research           38.1%        12
Review of Finance                       35.8%        13
Journal of Derivatives                  33.4%        14
Journal of Portfolio Management         32.4%        15
Financial Review                        32.2%        16
Pacific Basin Finance Journal           31.4%        17
European Financial Management           31.0%        18
Journal of Banking and Finance          30.1%        19
Journal of Futures Markets              29.2%        20
Journal of Empirical                    28.3%        21
  Finance
Journal of Business                     22.0%        22
  Finance and Accounting
Mathematical Finance                    19.3%        23

Panel B. Appearances in Individual Journal by Prolific Authors:
2000-2009

Review of Financial                     63.0%        1
Studies Journal of Finance              62.1%        2
Journal of Financial                    61.6%        3
  Economics
Journal of Financial                    55.7%        4
  and Quantitative Analysis
Journal of Business                     50.6%        5
Financial                               45.9%        6
Management Journal of Financial         45.5%        7
Markets Financial Analysts              40.0%        8
Journal Journal of Corporate            39.3%        9
  Finance
Journal of Applied                      39.3%        9
Corporate Finance Journal of            38.8%        11
  Financial Intermediation
Journal of Financial                    35.1%        12
  Research
Review of Finance                       34.4%        13
Financial Review                        32.1%        14
European Financial                      30.3%        15
Management Journal of Derivatives       29.5%        16
Journal of Portfolio                    28.9%        17
Management Journal of Empirical         28.0%        18
  Finance
Journal of Futures                      27.4%        19
Markets Pacific Basin Finance           26.9%        20
  Journal
Journal of Banking                      26.0%        21
  and Finance
Journal of Business                     19.1%        22
  Finance and Accounting
Mathematical Finance                    15.6%        23

                                          Column 2

                                         % by Authors
                                           with 5+
                                          Appearances
                                           in All 23

                                          %         Rank

Panel A. Appearances in Individual Journal by Prolific Authors:
1990-2009

Journal of Finance                      72.0%        1
Review of Financial Studies             70.2%        3
Journal of Financial Economics          70.3%        2
Journal of Financial and                70.0%        4
  Quantitative Analysis
Journal of Business                     60.2%        7
Financial Management                    65.8%        5
Journal of Financial Markets            59.2%        8
Journal of Applied Corporate Finance    54.2%        12
Journal of Financial Intermediation     53.8%        13
Journal of Corporate Finance            55.2%        11
Financial Analysts Journal              57.7%        9
Journal of Financial Research           61.9%        6
Review of Finance                       48.8%        16
Journal of Derivatives                  47.9%        18
Journal of Portfolio Management         50.2%        15
Financial Review                        56.3%        10
Pacific Basin Finance Journal           48.0%        17
European Financial Management           46.0%        20
Journal of Banking and Finance          46.6%        19
Journal of Futures Markets              51.4%        14
Journal of Empirical                    42.0%        21
  Finance
Journal of Business                     41.2%        22
  Finance and Accounting
Mathematical Finance                    30.7%        23

Panel B. Appearances in Individual Journal by Prolific Authors:
2000-2009

Review of Financial                     68.9%        3
Studies Journal of Finance              68.7%        4
Journal of Financial                    69.0%        2
  Economics
Journal of Financial                    69.3%        1
  and Quantitative Analysis
Journal of Business                     61.0%        6
Financial                               65.0%        5
Management Journal of Financial         60.0%        7
Markets Financial Analysts              59.0%        8
Journal Journal of Corporate            56.5%        10
  Finance
Journal of Applied                      49.2%        13
Corporate Finance Journal of            51.5%        12
  Financial Intermediation
Journal of Financial                    57.5%        9
  Research
Review of Finance                       47.9%        15
Financial Review                        56.1%        11
European Financial                      45.0%        17
Management Journal of Derivatives       43.8%        19
Journal of Portfolio                    46.0%        16
Management Journal of Empirical         42.9%        20
  Finance
Journal of Futures                      48.6%        14
Markets Pacific Basin Finance           44.2%        18
  Journal
Journal of Banking                      41.8%        21
  and Finance
Journal of Business                     35.9%        22
  Finance and Accounting
Mathematical Finance                    26.3%        23

                                          Column 3

                                         % by Authors
                                         with 5+ Elite
                                          Appearances

                                          %         Rank

Panel A. Appearances in Individual Journal by Prolific Authors:
1990-2009

Journal of Finance                      58.5%        2
Review of Financial Studies             59.4%        1
Journal of Financial Economics          56.3%        3
Journal of Financial and                44.2%        4
  Quantitative Analysis
Journal of Business                     39.0%        5
Financial Management                    26.9%        9
Journal of Financial Markets            30.8%        7
Journal of Applied Corporate Finance    31.4%        6
Journal of Financial Intermediation     28.2%        8
Journal of Corporate Finance            24.1%        10
Financial Analysts Journal              20.3%        12
Journal of Financial Research           14.3%        18
Review of Finance                       22.8%        11
Journal of Derivatives                  18.9%        13
Journal of Portfolio Management         14.5%        17
Financial Review                         8.2%        20
Pacific Basin Finance Journal           14.7%        15
European Financial Management           16.1%        14
Journal of Banking and Finance          13.6%        19
Journal of Futures Markets               7.1%        22
Journal of Empirical                    14.6%        16
  Finance
Journal of Business                      2.8%        23
  Finance and Accounting
Mathematical Finance                     8.0%        21

Panel B. Appearances in Individual Journal by Prolific Authors:
2000-2009

Review of Financial                     57.0%        1
Studies Journal of Finance              55.5%        2
Journal of Financial                    54.2%        3
  Economics
Journal of Financial                    42.1%        4
  and Quantitative Analysis
Journal of Business                     40.2%        5
Financial                               26.8%        8
Management Journal of Financial         30.9%        6
Markets Financial Analysts              20.9%        11
Journal Journal of Corporate            22.1%        10
  Finance
Journal of Applied                      29.4%        7
Corporate Finance Journal of            26.1%        9
  Financial Intermediation
Journal of Financial                    12.7%        16
  Research
Review of Finance                       20.9%        12
Financial Review                         8.1%        20
European Financial                      15.5%        13
Management Journal of Derivatives       15.2%        14
Journal of Portfolio                    11.7%        17
Management Journal of Empirical         13.1%        15
  Finance
Journal of Futures                       6.2%        21
Markets Pacific Basin Finance            9.5%        19
  Journal
Journal of Banking                      10.2%        18
  and Finance
Journal of Business                      2.2%        23
  Finance and Accounting
Mathematical Finance                     4.8%        22

                                         Column 4

                                       % by Authors
                                       with No Elite
                                        Appearances

                                             %

Panel A. Appearances in Individual Journal by Prolific Authors:
1990-2009

Journal of Finance                         0.0%
Review of Financial Studies                0.0%
Journal of Financial Economics             0.0%
Journal of Financial and                   0.0%
  Quantitative Analysis
Journal of Business                        0.0%
Financial Management                       35.8%
Journal of Financial Markets               31.1%
Journal of Applied Corporate Finance       50.9%
Journal of Financial Intermediation        34.7%
Journal of Corporate Finance               40.5%
Financial Analysts Journal                 54.6%
Journal of Financial Research              46.2%
Review of Finance                          41.4%
Journal of Derivatives                     59.2%
Journal of Portfolio Management            68.1%
Financial Review                           54.0%
Pacific Basin Finance Journal              59.2%
European Financial Management              60.9%
Journal of Banking and Finance             58.5%
Journal of Futures Markets                 65.8%
Journal of Empirical                       57.3%
  Finance
Journal of Business                        74.8%
  Finance and Accounting
Mathematical Finance                       73.5%

Panel B. Appearances in Individual Journal by Prolific Authors:
2000-2009

Review of Financial                        0.0%
Studies Journal of Finance                 0.0%
Journal of Financial                       0.0%
  Economics
Journal of Financial                       0.0%
  and Quantitative Analysis
Journal of Business                        0.0%
Financial                                  35.1%
Management Journal of Financial            31.1%
Markets Financial Analysts                 54.2%
Journal Journal of Corporate               41.5%
  Finance
Journal of Applied                         55.1%
Corporate Finance Journal of               36.7%
  Financial Intermediation
Journal of Financial                       48.0%
  Research
Review of Finance                          43.7%
Financial Review                           56.4%
European Financial                         63.3%
Management Journal of Derivatives          64.8%
Journal of Portfolio                       73.3%
Management Journal of Empirical            59.1%
  Finance
Journal of Futures                         71.6%
Markets Pacific Basin Finance              67.3%
  Journal
Journal of Banking                         53.5%
  and Finance
Journal of Business                        79.1%
  Finance and Accounting
Mathematical Finance                       79.9%
COPYRIGHT 2014 Financial Management Association
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2014 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Danielson, Morris G.; Heck, Jean L.
Publication:Financial Management
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Mar 22, 2014
Words:16995
Previous Article:Industrial diversification and underpricing of initial public offerings.
Next Article:Why are stock splits declining?
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2020 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters