|
on Sociology of Economics |
| By: | Hadavand, Aboozar (Minerva University); Hamermesh, Daniel S. (Barnard College); Wilson, Wesley W. (University of Oregon) |
| Abstract: | Publishing in economics proceeds much more slowly on average than in the natural sciences, and more slowly than in other social sciences and finance. It is even relatively slower at the extremes. We demonstrate that much of the lag, especially at the extremes, arises from authors' dilatory behavior in revising their work. The marginal product of an additional round of re-submission at the top economics journals is productive of additional subsequent citations; but conditional on re-submission, journals taking more time is not productive, and authors spending more time is associated with reduced scholarly impact. We offer several proposals to speed up the publication process. These include no-revisions policies, such as Economic Inquiry's; limits on authors' time revising articles, and limits on editors waiting for dilatory referees. |
| Keywords: | procrastination, top journals, sociology of economics, slowness, editorial behavior |
| JEL: | A11 B20 |
| Date: | 2021–08 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:iza:izadps:dp14643&r= |
| By: | Klaus Wohlrabe; Lutz Bornmann |
| Abstract: | In this article, we revisit the analysis of Laband and Tollison (2006) who documented that articles with two authors in alphabetical order are cited much more often than non-alphabetized papers with two authors in the American Economic Review and the American Journal of Agricultural Economics. Using more than 120,000 multi-authored articles from the Web of Science economics subject category, we demonstrate first that the alphabetization rate in economics has declined over the last decade. Second, we find no statistically significant relationship between alphabetized co-authorship and citations in economics using six different regression settings (the coefficients are very small). This result holds when accounting for intentionally or incidentally alphabetical ordering of authors. Third, we show that the likelihood of non-alphabetized co-authorship increases the more authors an article has. |
| Keywords: | alphabetization, co-authorship, citations, Web of Science |
| JEL: | A12 A14 |
| Date: | 2021 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ces:ceswps:_9230&r= |
| By: | Advani, Arun (University of Warwick and Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS)); Ash, Elliot (ETH Zurich); Cai, David (ETH Zurich); Rasul, Imran (University College London and IFS) |
| Abstract: | How does economics compare to other social sciences in its study of issues related to race and ethnicity? We assess this using a corpus of 500,000 academic publications in economics, political science, and sociology. Using an algorithmic approach to classify race-related publications, we document that economics lags far behind the other disciplines in the volume and share of race-related research, despite having higher absolute volumes of research output. Since 1960, there have been 13,000 race-related publications in sociology, 4,000 in political science, and 3,000 in economics. Since around 1970, the share of economics publications that are race-related has hovered just below 2% (although the share is higher in top-5 journals); in political science the share has been around 4% since the mid-1990s, while in sociology it has been above 6% since the 1960s and risen to over 12% in the last decade. Finally, using survey data collected from the Social Science Prediction Platform, we find economists tend to overestimate the amount of race-related research in all disciplines, but especially so in economics. |
| Keywords: | JEL Classification: A11, Z13 |
| Date: | 2021 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cge:wacage:565&r= |
| By: | Lester R. Lusher; Winnie Yang; Scott E. Carrell |
| Abstract: | Publishing takes a long time in economics. Consequently, many authors release “working” versions of their papers. Using data on the NBER working paper series, we show that the dissemination of economics research suffers from an overcrowding problem: An increase in the number of weekly released working papers on average reduces downloads, abstract views, and media attention for each paper. Subsequent publishing and citation outcomes are harmed as well. Furthermore, descriptive evidence on viewership and downloads suggests working papers significantly substitute for the dissemination function of publication. These results highlight inefficiencies in the dissemination of economic research even among the most exclusive working paper series and suggest large social losses due to the slow publication process. |
| JEL: | I2 J01 |
| Date: | 2021–08 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:29153&r= |
| By: | Cynthia Bansak; Ellen E. Meade; Martha Starr-McCluer |
| Abstract: | The shortage of women and historically underrepresented racial and ethnic groups in the economics profession has received considerable public attention in the past several years. The American Economic Association (AEA), the professional organization for economists, has been taking steps to address criticism that the economics discipline is unwelcoming to women and underrepresented minorities. |
| Date: | 2021–08–06 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:fip:fedgfn:2021-08-06-2&r= |