We present rankings of authors who published in the JRI over the 22-year period from
1989 to 2010 based on the number of articles, adjusted and unadjusted for coauthor-
ship. We show that adjusting for coauthorship is important to productivity rankings.
Coauthorship is very common with more than 71 percent of JRI articles having multiple
authors. Many universities explicitly state in their tenure and promotion guidelines that
consideration is to be given for coauthorship. Further, almost all studies of research
productivity among authors publishing in risk and insurance journals report results
adjusted for coauthorship. Perhaps as an indication of the rigor of the JRI review pro-
cess, only 26 percent of authors in our sample published two or more JRI articles. The
top two authors each published 14 articles. The top author published about 8.2 articles
after coauthorship adjustment. Six of the top 10 (and two of the top 3) authors based on
number of articles are the same with and without the coauthorship adjustment.
The focus of our study is author rankings based on citations to JRI articles published in
the 1989–2010 period that appear in the WOS between 1989 and 2014. The top author
received almost 300 citations, while the average author received about 16. The most cited
article received 95 citations. The top 50 authors account for 37 percent of the total nonself-
citations. The impact JRI authors have on insurance and noninsurance journals varies,
as only 24 authors are ranked among the top 50 based on citations in both insurance and
noninsurance journals. The author rankings vary the greatest when authors are ranked
13 Table 9 includes the top 50 “author-articles.” For example, an article with three authors corre-
sponds to three “author-articles.” As such, because most JRI articles are coauthored, including
the most cited JRI articles, fewer than 50 articles are represented in Table 9. Further, coauthors of
the same article may have a different number of citations because we exclude self-citations, and
some authors may have cited the specific article themselves in Table 9 more than their coauthors.