One-and-a-half decades of global research output in Finance: 1990-2004

被引：16

作者：

Chan K.C. ^{[1
]}

Chen C.R. ^{[2
]}

Lung P.P. ^{[2
]}

机构：

[1] Department of Finance, Western Kentucky University

[2] Department of Economics and Finance, University of Dayton, Dayton

来源：

Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting | 2007年 / 28卷 / 4期

关键词：

Finance research; Institutional ranking; Investor protection;

D O I：

10.1007/s11156-007-0018-y

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

We provide a ranking of world finance research output by countries and institutions. Based upon 21 finance journals, the top five most productive countries are in the following order: U.S., U.K., Canada, Hong Kong, and Australia. We find that higher per capita GNP, English-speaking countries, and a capital market that offers her investors more protections are associated with higher level of finance literature production. New York University, the University of Pennsylvania, Harvard University, the University of Chicago, and UCLA take the top five spots among the 1,126 academic institutions with most JF-pages appeared in 21 finance journals during the 15-year period from 1990 to 2004. The share of U.S. in the top-100 institutions is overwhelming; 78 out of the top-100 institutions come from U.S. We also show some factors that help to explain the cross-institutional variations among a sub-sample of the institutions. Specifically, faculty size, catalyst effect, and per capita budget are positively associated with research output. © 2007 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC.

引用

页码：417 / 439

页数：22

共 17 条

[1]

Alexander J.C., Mabry R.H., Relative significance of journals, authors, and articles cited in financial research, Journal of Finance, 49, pp. 697-712, (1994)

[2]

Borokhovich K.A., Bricker R.J., Brunarski K.R., Simkins B.S., Accounting research productivity and influence, Journal of Finance, 50, pp. 1691-1717, (1995)

[3]

Brown L.D., Influential accounting articles, individuals, Ph.D. granting institutions and faculties: A citational analysis, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 21, pp. 723-754, (1996)

[4]

Chan K.C., Chen C.R., Cheng L., Ranking research productivity in accounting for Asia-Pacific universities, Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 24, pp. 47-64, (2005)

[5]

Chan K.C., Chen C.R., Lung P.L., A ranking of finance programs in the Asia-Pacific region: 1990-2004, Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 13, pp. 584-600, (2005)

[6]

Chan K.C., Chen C.R., Steiner T., Production in the finance literature, institutional reputation, and labor mobility in the academia: A global perspective, Financial Management, 31, pp. 131-156, (2002)

[7]

Conroy M.E., Dusansky R., Drukker D., Kildegaard A., The productivity of economics departments in the U.S.: Publications in the core journals, Journal of Economic Literature, 33, pp. 1966-1971, (1995)

[8]

Collins J.T., Cox R.G., Stango V., The publishing patterns of recent economics Ph.D. recipients, Economic Inquiry, 38, pp. 358-367, (2000)

[9]

Damgaard C., Gini coefficient, MathWorld-A Wolfram Web Resource, (2003)

[10]

Hasselback J.R., Reinstein A., A proposal for measuring scholarly productivity of accounting faculty, Issues in Accounting Education, 10, pp. 269-306, (1995)

← 1 2 →