Real estate is an emerging academic discipline with no clear consensus on the rank and importance of real estate journals. Attempts to rank journals in the field or measure research output are either dated because the population of journals has changed, or the studies have limited data or methodology problems. This study builds on the previous studies by surveying both academic and professional members of the two major academic real estate organizations [(the American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association (AREUEA) and the American Real Estate Society (ARES)] to gain understanding of the relative importance of each journal to the promotion and tenure process and in providing information directly applicable to professional practice.
As the field continues to grow, new academic and professional journals emerge as publishing outlets for academic real estate research. However, unlike more fully evolved fields, such as economics and finance, academic real estate has no consensus of journal rankings for promotion and tenure or professional applicability. A primary concern of this paper is to classify journals into one of two groups, academic or professional, based on the perceptions of survey respondents.
Journal rankings and bibliometric research have been conducted in other business fields. Howard and Nisolai (1983) measured the perceptions toward publishing outlets in the field of accounting. Coe and Weinstocks (1983) examined the evaluation of finance journals. Chung and Cox (1990) studied patterns of research output and author concentrations in the finance journals.
Attempts have also been made to rank journals and conduct bibliometric analysis in the field of real estate. In the first study of academic research in real estate, Albert and Chandy (1986) surveyed the members of the American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association and were able to produce a subjective ranking of the top twenty journals and the ten most influential academics but could not find consensus on the most influential articles. The data were reported in descriptive fashion with no statistical analysis.
Smith and Greenwade (1987) addressed the perceived rankings of real estate publications and their impact in meeting the tenure requirements at American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) member schools. The authors surveyed approximately 400 deans of business schools randomly selected from the 1986-87 AACSB Membership Directory. This study produced a journal ranking list that was different from the Albert and Chandy survey.
Chung and Kolbe (1991) departed from the survey rankings of journals and concentrated their study on article authorship. They examined seventeen real estate journals to see if the pattern of research productivity in real estate conforms to an empirical regularity such as Lotka's Law, which proposes that scientific productivity is dominated by a few "superstars," much like other fields of human endeavor. The results show that a generalized version of Lotka's Law is an excellent description of the empirical distribution of research patterns in the real estate literature. Further, real estate was found to have a lower author concentration than other related fields, a phenomenon the authors attribute to its youth.
Clauretie and Daneshvary (1993) ranked individuals who published in three major real estate journals: Real Estate Economics (formerly the Journal of the American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association), Journal of Real Estate Research and Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics. The results show that the top 20 authors are more diversified with respect to the fields in which they publish than their colleagues. Also, some publications are more influential than others, being more frequently cited by other authors. Sa-Aadu and Shilling (1988) compiled the rankings of the contributing authors to Real Estate Economics, the origins of their doctoral degrees, and their employers from 1973 to 1987. The contributing authors were diverse over this period, with doctoral degrees from 74 institutions and more than 180 employers.
These previous studies on journal rankings and research output are valuable, but there is a need for current research. A new academic organization (the American Real Estate Society) has emerged with substantial differences in membership from previously polled populations. New academic journals have been created (The Journal of Real Estate Research, the Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics and the Journal of Real Estate Literature). A formerly ranked journal (the Real Estate Appraiser and Analyst) has ceased publication. Academic real estate has broadened from its former strong affiliation with economics and finance, and the attitudes of the academic community may have shifted.
The third section lists 30 real estate-oriented journals used by real estate academics as publication outlets and asks the respondent to rate each journal based on how important each journal is in the promotion and tenure process at their current or most recent academic institution. Non-academic professionals were asked to answer based on their perception of the promotion and tenure process. Space was provided for the respondent to fill in any other journals deemed appropriate. Respondents were also asked to identify the number of publications they had in each journal in the last five years and in total. The order of the journals was randomized and different versions of the journal order were used to reduce order bias.
The fourth section of the questionnaire repeated the list of journals, but respondents were asked to rate each journal based upon the quality of information directly applicable to professional practice. While there are many journals other than pure real estate journals that may be influential in the academic and professional communities, the survey was limited to real estate journals to ensure a ranking of these journals only.1
The mailing list consisted of all academic and professional members of AREUEA and ARES. The membership lists were compared to eliminate double mailings to those who are members of both associations. The questionnaires were mailed out with a personalized letter addressed to the respondent and a postage-paid business reply envelope. A total of 288 useable responses was received.
Surveys were partitioned into subgroups based on respondent characteristics in order to answer two key questions: (1) Do subgroups have similar views about the relative importance of various real estate journals to the tenure and promotion process; and (2) Do subgroups have similar views about the relative applicability of various real estate journals to professional real estate practice.
The subgroups identified for pairwise comparison of these questions are: (1) tenured versus non-tenured, tenure track faculty; (2) real estate practitioners versus academics; (3) members of AREUEA who are not members of ARES versus members of ARES who are not members of AREUEA; (4) faculty from Ph.D. granting institutions versus faculty of academic institutions that do not award Ph.D.s; (5) faculty who evaluate the performance of other faculty (i.e., chairpersons) versus faculty who do not; (6) faculty who are members of academic departments that include real estate in the department title versus faculty who are members of academic departments that do not include real estate in the department title.
Finally, K-Means Cluster Analysis employing nearest centroid sorting was used to determine academic and professional journal groupings.2 Cluster analysis is a typological or classification methodology whose purpose is to find natural groupings (clusters) of objects, in this case, journals, so that objects in the same group are more like each other than they are like objects in other groups. When object characteristics can be quantified, object "alikeness" or resemblance can be measured as interpoint distance in metric space. The resemblance measure commonly used in cluster analysis is Euclidean distance which is defined as the square root of the sum of the squared differences between the values for each variable (characteristic) of an object (journal) and its respective group center (centroid). That is,
Eight variables (characteristics) for each journal were taken from survey results and utilized to characterize the data: (1) average rating on promotion and tenure by academics; (2) standard deviation of rating on promotion and tenure by academics; (3) average rating on professional applicability by academics; (4) standard deviation of rating on professional applicability by academics; (5) average rating on promotion and tenure by professionals; (6) standard deviation of rating on promotion and tenure by professionals; (7) average rating on professional applicability by professionals; and (8) standard deviation of rating on professional applicability by professionals. Two journals, Canadian Appraisal Journal and Real Estate Law Journal had insufficient responses to calculate all of these variables and were eliminated from the analysis. Reduced models of four variables (numbers 1, 3, 5, 7) and two variables (numbers 1 and 3) were also employed but resulted in the same clustering. These results are presented in the next section.
Practitioners and academics rated journals differently with respect to the tenure process and to professional applicability. These significant rating differences also converted into meaningful ranking differences and suggest a general difference of opinion between the two groups. While practitioner assessments of the importance of journals to the tenure process did not reflect academics' judgments, the judgment of academics about the professional applicability of journals also did not mirror practitioner perceptions. This latter discrepancy is especially critical to those academics interested in presenting results of their applied research in the most opportune outlet. Another interesting result is that members of ARES who are not members of AREUEA rate journals differently for both tenure importance and professional relevancy than do members of AREUEA who are not members of ARES, reflecting perhaps differences in organizational orientation as shown in the announced purposes of the respective journals.
In terms of tenure importance, faculty associated with Ph.D. granting institutions rated journals differently than faculty from non-Ph.D. granting institutions, although rankings proved fairly similar. These differences may reflect differing promotion and tenure processes confronting these two subgroups rather than reflecting different opinions about a similar promotion and tenure process. With respect to professional applicability, the ratings of these two groups were not statistically different. Also examined were differences between faculty within real estate departments versus those within non-real estate departments. Again ratings were significantly different as they were with these two subgroups when rating professional applicability.4
Figure 1 offers a visual representation of the two variable cluster analysis. The two variable group assignments shown at the bottom of Figure 1 were identical to the eight variable and four variable results. Eight journals clustered into the academic group. In alphabetical order they are Journal of Housing Economics, Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Journal of Real Estate Literature, Journal of Real Estate Research, Journal of Regional Science, Journal of Urban Economics, Land Economics and Real Estate Economics. The remaining twenty journals (excluding the Canadian Appraisal Journal and the Real Estate Law Journal which had insufficient rating response) were included in the professional journal grouping. Notable among these professional journals is the Appraisal Journal, whose good academic ratings pull it closer to the academic group than any other professionally classified journal, but whose strong professional ratings nonetheless make clear its professional constituency.
In terms of ranking for academic purposes, a relatively clear picture emerged. Real Estate Economics is the top ranked journal for academic purposes. An interesting exception exists among members of AREUEA who are not ARES members. This subgroup places the Journal of Urban Economics at the top. Among total AREUEA respondents (regardless of ARES affiliation) Real Estate Economics was once more ranked at the top. Another exception is among practitioners who placed Real Estate Economics second for promotion and tenure purposes to the Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics.
Significantly different ratings were also found for the relative applicability of various real estate journals to professional real estate practice. Differences were found between practitioners versus academics, members of only AREUEA versus members of only ARES and faculty in departments including real estate versus those in departments without real estate. No significant differences were found, however, between tenured versus tenure track faculty and between faculty who evaluate other faculty versus faculty who do not evaluate other faculty. The Appraisal Journal was generally the highest ranked journal for professional applicability. The responding real estate community appears to classify journals into two groups, an academic one headed by Real Estate Economics and a professional one led by the Appraisal Journal.
The results of this study differ from previous bibliometric studies in real estate journal rankings in that it surveyed two academic groups, employed the previously unused technique of cluster analysis, and differentiated between academic and professional journals. There are several reasons for this. First, because real estate is such a diverse field, academics active in it may be found in departments of finance, real estate, insurance, legal studies, hospitality administration, urban economics, architecture, planning and geography, which can account for diversity in perceptions of journals. Second, new journals have begun publication while others have ceased publication. Third, like accountancy, academic real estate has a complimentary industry and much of the research is published in applied professional journals. Often the professional versus academic character of journals becomes blurred in applied fields such as real estate. Fourth, different methodologies have been used in the various studies. Fifth, the previous studies have not included the opinions of members of ARES or the professional community.
As the field continues to evolve, there will be a need for further studies to update the changing perceptions of journal quality, author productivity, authorship by doctoral origin and employers of real estate authors.