|
on Sociology of Economics |
|
Issue of 2013‒06‒16
five papers chosen by Jonas Holmström Swedish School of Economics and Business Administration |
| By: | Hadi Farhadi (UKM - Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia - School of Psychology and Human Development, Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), Malaysia); Hadi Salehi (IAU, Najafabad - Islamic Azad University, Najafabad - Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Isfahan, Iran); Melor Md Yunus (UKM - Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia - Faculty Of Education, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (ukm), Malaysia); Aghaei Chadegani Arezoo (IAU, Mobarakeh - Islamic Azad University, Mobarakeh - Department of Accounting, Mobarakeh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Mobarakeh, Isfahan, Iran); Maryam Farhadi (IAU, Mobarakeh - Islamic Azad University, Mobarakeh - Department of Accounting, Mobarakeh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Mobarakeh, Isfahan, Iran); Masood Fooladi (IAU, Mobarakeh - Islamic Azad University, Mobarakeh - Department of Accounting, Mobarakeh Branch); Nader Ale Ebrahim (UM - University of Malaya - Department of Engineering Design and Manufacture, Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya) |
| Abstract: | h-index retrieved by citation indexes (Scopus, Google scholar, and Web of Science) is used to measure the scientific performance and the research impact studies based on the number of publications and citations of a scientist. It also is easily available and may be used for performance measures of scientists, and for recruitment decisions. The aim of this study is to investigate the difference between the outputs and results from these three citation databases namely Scopus, Google Scholar, and Web of Science based upon the h-index of a group of highly cited researchers (Nobel Prize winner scientist). The purposive sampling method was adopted to collect the required data. The results showed that there is a significant difference in the h-index between three citation indexes of Scopus, Google scholar, and Web of Science; the Google scholar h-index was more than the h-index in two other databases. It was also concluded that there is a significant positive relationship between h-indices based on Google scholar and Scopus. The citation indexes of Scopus, Google scholar, and Web of Science may be useful for evaluating h-index of scientists but they have some limitations as well. |
| Keywords: | h-index, Scopus, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Nobel Prize, Physics, Chemistry, Economic Sciences. |
| Date: | 2013 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00830415&r=sog |
| By: | John P. Conley (Vanderbilt University); Ali Sina Onder (Universität Bayreuth) |
| Abstract: | We study the research productivity of new graduates of top Ph.D. programs in economics. We find that class rank is as important as departmental rank as predictors of future research productivity. For example the best graduate from UIUC or Toronto in a given year will have roughly the same number of American Economic Review (AER) equivalent publications at year six after graduation as the number three graduate from Berkeley, U. Penn or Yale. We also find that research productivity of graduates drops off very quickly with class rank at all departments. For example, even at Harvard, the median graduate has only 0.04 AER paper at year six, an untenurable record at almost any department. These results provide guidance on how much weight to give to place of graduation relative to class standing when hiring new assistant professors. They also suggest that even the top departments are not doing a very good job of training students to be successful research economists for any not in the top of their class. |
| Keywords: | Research Productivity, Academic Labor Markets, Hiring, Publication, Economics Departments, Graduate Training |
| JEL: | A1 J0 |
| Date: | 2013–05–28 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:van:wpaper:vuecon-sub-13-00009&r=sog |
| By: | Geschwind, Lars (Royal Institute of Technology); Broström, Anders (CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies, Royal Institute of Technology) |
| Abstract: | This paper demonstrates that while ideals of close linkages between research and teaching are widely embraced in research-oriented universities, a practice of division of labour between teaching-oriented and research-oriented staff persists. In an investigation of how the research-teaching nexus is managed at three Swedish universities, we identify a perceived misalignment between institutional incentives for individual academic staff and the needs of teaching. Under pressure from such tensions, managers are forced to deploy pragmatic strategies for the staffing of undergraduate education tasks. This includes allowing research needs and agendas to take priority over teaching needs. While managers actively struggle to secure the participation of senior researchers in education, they often actively prefer to delegate the bulk of teaching activities to less research-active staff. Such strategies seem to reinforce existing patterns of division of labour among academic staff. |
| Keywords: | Teaching-research nexus; university management; research-oriented education |
| JEL: | I21 I23 |
| Date: | 2013–06–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hhs:cesisp:0316&r=sog |
| By: | John P. Conley (Vanderbilt University) |
| Abstract: | This letter calls attention a recent trend in economics publishing that seems to have slipped under the radar: large increases in submissions rates across a wide range of economics journals and steeply declining acceptance rates as a consequence. It is argued that this is bad for scholarly communication, bad for economics as a science, and imposes significant and wasteful costs on editors, referees, authors, and especially young people trying to establish themselves in the profession. It is further argued that the new “Big Deal” business model used by commercial publishers is primarily responsible for this situation. Finally it is argued that this represents a compelling reason to take advantage of new technologies to take control of certifying and distributing research away from commercial publishers and return it to scholarly community. |
| Keywords: | Publishing, Scholarly Communication, Open Access, Big Deal, Fractional Reserve, Money |
| JEL: | A0 A1 |
| Date: | 2013–05–28 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:van:wpaper:vuecon-sub-13-00008&r=sog |
| By: | Till Düppe (University of Quebec at Montreal); E. Roy Weintraub (Duke University) |
| Abstract: | In the decades following WWII, the Cowles Commission for Research in Economics came to represent new technical standards that informed most advances in economic theory. The public emergence of this community was manifest at a conference held in June 1949 titled Activity Analysis of Production and Allocation. Our history of this event situates the Cowles Commission among the institutions of post-war science in-between National Laboratories and the supreme discipline of Cold War academia, mathematics. Although the conference created the conditions under which economics, as a discipline, would transform itself, the participants themselves had little concern for the intellectual battles that had defined prewar university economics departments. The conference bore witness to a new intellectual culture in economic science based on shared scientific norms and techniques un-interrogated by conflicting notions of the meaning of either science or economics. |
| Keywords: | Cowles Commission, activity analysis, linear programming, general equilibrium theory, von Neumann, Koopmans, Dantzig, fixed point theorems |
| JEL: | B2 C0 |
| Date: | 2013–06 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hes:wpaper:0040&r=sog |