Want Amid Plenty: Developing and Testing a Cross-National Measure of Anomie

One of the biggest challenges facing researchers trying to empirically test structural or institutional anomie theories is the operationalization of the key concept of anomie. This challenge is heightened by the data constraints involved in cross-national research. As a result, researchers have been forced to rely on surrogate or proxy measures of anomie and indirect tests of the theories. The purpose of this study is to examine an innovative and more theoretically sound measure of anomie and to test its ability to make cross-national predictions of serious crime. Our results are supportive of the efficacy of this construct to explain cross-national variations in crime rates. Nations with the highest rates of structural anomie also have the highest predicted rates of homicide.

Is VHB-JOURQUAL2 a Good Measure of Scientific Quality? Assessing the Validity of the Major Business Journal Ranking in German-Speaking Countries

This study examines the question of whether the journal ranking VHB-JOURQUAL 2 can be considered as a good measure for the construct “scientific quality”. Various rankings in business research provide the database for the analysis. The correlations between theses rankings are used to assess the validity of VHB-JOURQUAL 2 along various validity criteria. The correlations with rankings that measure the same construct based on different methods show that VHB-JOURQUAL 2 has acceptable, but moderate convergent validity. The validity varies considerably across disciplines, showing that the heterogeneity of business administration is not sufficiently represented by this overall ranking. The variability is related to the variation in members per discipline represented by the German Association for Business Research. Furthermore, the measure shows a weak correlation with acceptance rates as an indicator of nomological validity in some disciplines.