Resumen
The adoption of journal lists as proxies to scholarship quality has sparked an ongoing debate among academics over what is meant by quality, how it is perceived by the reviewers, and the thresholds for the rating, inclusion, or exclusion of journals from these lists. Given the insufficient transparencies in the processes of journal quality evaluation when composing such lists, this research explores the use of the revealed preference approach to attune the ratings in both the Australian Business Deans Council Journal Quality List and Academic Journal Guide, and approximate the rating of management journals if they were to be considered for inclusion in either of the two aforementioned lists.