|
on Sociology of Economics |
| By: | Beverly Hirtle; Anna Kovner |
| Abstract: | We analyze 6, 400 letters of recommendation for more than 2, 200 economics and finance Ph.D. graduates from 2018 to 2021. Letter text varies significantly by field of interest, with significantly less positive and shorter letters for Macroeconomics and Finance candidates. Letters for female and Black or Hispanic job candidates are weaker in some dimensions, while letters for Asian candidates are notably less positive overall. We introduce a new measure of letter quality capturing candidates that are recommended to “top” departments. Female, Asian, and Black or Hispanic candidates are all less likely to be recommended to top academic departments, even after controlling for other letter characteristics. Finally, we examine early career outcomes and find that letter characteristics, especially a “top” recommendation have meaningful effects on initial job placements and journal publications. |
| Keywords: | recommendation letters; gender in economics; Race and ethnicity; research institutions; professional labor markets |
| JEL: | A11 A23 J15 J16 |
| Date: | 2024–10–01 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:fip:fednsr:98958 |
| By: | Casamonti, Matilde; Zinovyeva, Natalia |
| Abstract: | We analyze the impact of evaluator and candidate gender on the language used in academic evaluations using data on 295, 000 evaluation reports for applicants seeking professorial promotion across all academic fields in Italy. In this context, candidates are assessed by a national-level committee composed of five randomly selected evaluators from the corresponding field. We observe that the language used in evaluation reports varies significantly with applicants’ productivity and professional ties to evaluators, but we find no indication that the language of the assessments depends on the gender of either the candidates or the evaluators. |
| Keywords: | Academic Evaluations, Women in Academia, Gendered Language JEL Classification: I23, J16, J71, M51 |
| Date: | 2024 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cge:wacage:720 |
| By: | Ria Ivandic; Anne Sophie Lassen |
| Abstract: | Women are underrepresented in senior academic positions in economics. Ria Ivandic and Anne Sophie Lassen assess the impact of having children on men and women's career trajectories. |
| Keywords: | education, child care, equality |
| Date: | 2024–10–18 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cep:cepcnp:690 |
| By: | Mohamed Bassi |
| Abstract: | This Policy Brief examines economic research in Africa using data from the RePEc (Research Papers in Economics) platform. It examines the productivity of researchers affiliated with African institutions, some of whom are extremely prolific, while the average for the continent as a whole remains below international standards. As a result, Africa's contribution to global economic research as a whole remains modest, despite the continent's considerable economic stakes. The paper then looks at prevailing research themes by analyzing CIP and JEL codes, and examining titles and keywords attached to publications. This shows that research priorities of African economics researchers depend on institutional affiliation, with some focusing on African issues, while others take on topics of global importance. |
| Date: | 2023–09 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ocp:pbecon:pb_38_23 |
| By: | Alexandre Truc (GREDEG - Groupe de Recherche en Droit, Economie et Gestion - UNS - Université Nice Sophia Antipolis (1965 - 2019) - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UniCA - Université Côte d'Azur); Dorian Jullien (CES - Centre d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, UP1 UFR02 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - École d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne) |
| Abstract: | This paper studies the controversy on Fehr and Schmidt's model of inequity aversion. It borrows insights from disciplines such as philosophy and the sociology of science that have specialized in studying scientific controversies. Our goal is to contribute to the historical and methodological literature on behavioral economics, which happens to have neglected behavioral economists' research on social preferences. Our analysis of the controversy reveals some new insights about the relation of behavioral economics with other sub-fields in economics, as well as with other disciplines. |
| Keywords: | Controversies, Behavioral Economics, Rhetoric, Social Preferences, Norms, Inequity Aversion |
| Date: | 2023 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04719263 |
| By: | Christoph Carnehl; Marco Ottaviani; Justus Preusser |
| Abstract: | This paper overviews the economics of scientific grants, focusing on the interplay between the inherent uncertainty in research, researchers' incentives, and grant design. Grants differ from traditional market systems and other science and innovation policy tools, such as prizes and patents. We outline the main economic forces specific to science, noting the limited attention given to grant funding in the economics literature. Using tools from information economics, we identify key incentive problems at various stages of the grant funding process and offer guidance for effective grant design. In the allocation stage, funders aim to select the highest-merit applications while minimizing evaluation costs. The selection rule, in turn, impacts researchers' incentives to apply and invest in their proposals. In the grant management stage, funders monitor researchers to ensure efficient use of funds. We discuss the advantages and potential pitfalls of (partial) lotteries and emphasize the effectiveness of staged grant design in promoting a productive use of grants. Beyond these broadly applicable insights, our overview highlights the need for further research on grantmaking. Understudied areas include, at the micro level, the interplay of different grant funding stages, and at the macro level, the interaction of grants with other instruments in the market for science. |
| Date: | 2024–10 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:arx:papers:2410.12356 |
| By: | Alexandre Truc (GREDEG - Groupe de Recherche en Droit, Economie et Gestion - UNS - Université Nice Sophia Antipolis (1965 - 2019) - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UniCA - Université Côte d'Azur); Olivier Santerre (UdeS - Université de Sherbrooke); Yves Gingras (UQAM - Université du Québec à Montréal = University of Québec in Montréal); François Claveau (UdeS - Université de Sherbrooke) |
| Abstract: | Economics has the reputation to be an insular discipline with little consideration for other social sciences and humanities (SSH). Recent research (Angrist et al., 2020) challenges this perception of economics: the perception would be historically inaccurate and especially at odds with the recent interdisciplinarity of economics. By systematically studying citation patterns since the 1950s in thousands of journals, we offer the best established conclusions to date on this issue. Our results do show that the discipline is uniquely insular from a historical point of view. But we also document an important turn after the 1990s that drastically transformed the discipline as it became more open, very quickly, to the influence of management, environmental sciences and to a lesser degree, a variety of the SSH. While this turn made economics less uniquely insular, as of today economics remains the least outward-looking discipline with management among all SSH. Furthermore, unlike in the other major social sciences, the most influential journals in economics have not significantly contributed to the recent increase in the interdisciplinarity of the discipline. While economics is changing, it is too soon to claim that it has completed an interdisciplinary turn. |
| Date: | 2023 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04719259 |