Trends in Communication Scholarship: An Analysis of Four Representative NCA and ICA Journals over the Last 70 Years

Abstract

As the demand for research productivity continues to rise for communication scholars, it is important to understand the norms that govern publication in our scholarly journals, since these influence promotion and tenure decisions. This project examined publication patterns of four representative communication journals to discern publication norms and changes in them over time. Findings showed an increase in article length, number of references, multiple-authored publications, female authorship, and quantitative studies, but no significant change in number of articles per journal issue. These trends have a number of potential applications for communication scholars.

Keywords:

• Trends
• Communication Scholarship
• NCA and ICA Journals
• Research Productivity

A previous version of this paper was presented at the National Communication Association Annual Convention in San Antonio, Texas, November 2006.

A previous version of this paper was presented at the National Communication Association Annual Convention in San Antonio, Texas, November 2006.

Notes

A previous version of this paper was presented at the National Communication Association Annual Convention in San Antonio, Texas, November 2006.

1. We excluded Quarterly Journal of Speech, Communication Education, Critical Studies in Media Communication, and Text and Performance Quarterly, and Communication Theory. Some readers may particularly object to the exclusion of QJS, the oldest journal in our discipline. Although in its early years, it broadly represented the content areas of the field (including theater and speech pathology), for the last few decades it has become almost exclusively the journal for rhetoric, public address, and political communication. As such, it no longer broadly represents the content areas of the discipline. Other readers may believe CT should have been included. It does include most subdisciplines of our field. However, as a relatively new journal, it provides little insight into stability or change. Other readers may believe that JoC should be excluded, since originally it was predominately a mass communication journal. We included it because it has moved toward being more inclusive of our field rather than toward being more exclusive. Others may feel that HCR should be excluded because it does not broadly represent the methodological richness of the field. We included it because it does publish research that broadly represents the content areas of the field.

2. The analyses comparing JoC and HCR for every year with every third year found a remarkable consistency. For example, the correlation for number of pages to years was r = .629 for every year and r = .628 for every third year. Results for the ANOVAs comparing various categories by decade had the same significant and nonsignificant results. For example, the number of female authors increased significantly over the decades, and the number of male authors did not change significantly whether we used every year or every third year. Overall, there were no significant differences in the results.

3. Intercoder reliabilities should be calculated when coding involves making (subjective) judgments, typical of content analysis. The coding in this study was objective (e.g., number of pages or references, author gender, research method) and involved little or no judgment. As a result, intercoder reliabilities were deemed superfluous.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Michael W. Kramer

Michael W. Kramer (Ph.D., 1991, University of Texas at Austin) is chair and professor in the Department of Communication at the University of Missouri

Jon A. Hess

Jon A. Hess (Ph.D., 1996, Minnesota) is an Associate Professor in the Department of Communication at the University of Missouri

Loren D. Reid

Loren D. Reid (Ph.D., 1932, Iowa) is professor emeritus in the Department of Communication at the University of Missouri