Full Picture

Article analysis:

The article "25 years and counting of corporate finance: What have we learned and where are we going?" provides a retrospective analysis of the Journal of Corporate Finance (JCF) over the past 25 years. The authors acknowledge the contribution of JCF's editors, associate editors, and authors in establishing it as an internationally respected finance journal. They also provide a word cloud analysis of author-provided keywords in JCF papers published from 1994 to 2018, which shows the evolution of topics covered by the journal over time.

The article is well-written and informative, providing valuable insights into the development of corporate finance research over the past quarter-century. However, there are some potential biases and limitations that should be considered.

Firstly, the article focuses exclusively on JCF and does not compare its impact or coverage with other finance journals. While it is acknowledged that JF, JFE, and RFS are considered top-tier finance journals, there is no discussion about how their coverage or focus differs from JCF. This could lead to a biased view of corporate finance research as represented by JCF alone.

Secondly, while the word cloud analysis provides a useful overview of topics covered by JCF over time, it does not provide any information about how these topics were addressed or what conclusions were drawn from them. This limits our understanding of how corporate finance research has evolved over time beyond just topic coverage.

Thirdly, there is no discussion about potential biases in the selection or publication process for papers in JCF. For example, it is possible that certain topics or perspectives may be favored over others due to editorial preferences or reviewer biases. Without addressing these potential sources of bias, it is difficult to fully evaluate the impact and validity of research published in JCF.

Overall, while this article provides valuable insights into the development of corporate finance research over the past 25 years as represented by JCF, it would benefit from a more critical analysis of potential biases and limitations in its coverage and selection process.