An Assessment of Journal Quality in Public Administration

Using results from a survey of editors and board members from 39 public administration journals as well the impact factor scores created by ISI Thompson this research develops an integrated assessment of journal quality using both objective and subjective measurement tools. The findings suggest that relying on one ranking approach misses out on several important issues regarding journal quality. In addition, when evaluating outlets for publishing in public administration, there often exists a bias against journals not published in the United States. Finally, the highest-ranked generalist journals are also publishing work that is also applicable to scholars working in various subfields.