nep-sog New Economics Papers
on Sociology of Economics
Issue of 2025–03–31
five papers chosen by
Jonas Holmström, Axventure AB


  1. Toward Open Science in Marketing Research By Deer, Lachlan; Adler, Susanne Jana; Datta, Hannes; Mizik, Natalie; Sarstedt, Marko
  2. Why most journal impact factors are false By Moustafa, Khaled
  3. The Responsible Research(er) Recruitment Checklist: A best practice guide for applying principles of responsible research assessment in researcher recruitment materials By Henderson, Emma Louise; Darby, Robert; Farran, Emily Kate
  4. Open Research as an Imperative for Institutions: Boosting Research, Revenue, and Reputation By Henderson, Emma Louise; Jacobs, Neil; Farran, Emily Kate
  5. Research portfolios of universities. searching for opportunities and collaboration partners By Paulo Morceiro; Ron Boschma; Pierre-Alex Balland

  1. By: Deer, Lachlan (Tilburg University); Adler, Susanne Jana (Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich); Datta, Hannes; Mizik, Natalie; Sarstedt, Marko (Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich)
    Abstract: The open science paradigm has gained prominence in marketing as researchers seek to enhance the validity, reliability, and transparency of research methods and findings. Journals and institutions increasingly encourage or require open science practices, and many authors have started to adapt to and meet these new research and publishing expectations. We provide guidance for the effective implementation of open science practices in empirical marketing research across each subdiscipline, tailored to the unique methodological approaches and challenges inherent to their specific research contexts. Successful integration of these practices into academic marketing research will require concerted and collaborative efforts among authors, journals, institutions, and funding agencies. We argue that the gradual, thoughtful adoption of these principles and practices will improve the quality and efficiency of scientific discovery.
    Date: 2024–02–21
    URL: https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:osfxxx:f7a8c_v1
  2. By: Moustafa, Khaled (Founder & Editor of ArabiXiv)
    Abstract: The Journal Impact Factor (JIF) is a widely used metric for ranking journals based on the number of citations garnered by papers published over a specific timeframe. To assess the accuracy of JIF values, I compared citation counts for 20 of my own publications across six major bibliography databases: CrossRef, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Scopus, PubMed, and Publishing journal records. The analysis revealed noteworthy variations in citation counts, ranging from 10% to over 50% between the lowest and highest citation counts. Google Scholar records the highest citation numbers, while PubMed reported the lowest. Notably, Web of Science, whose citation data are used in JIF calculations, tend to underestimate citation counts compared to other databases. These findings raise concerns about the accuracy of JIF calculation, as currently based on Web of Science’s citation data. The real JIF values for most journals would differ from those annually reported by Clarivate's journal citation reports (JCR). These observations underscore the importance of comprehensive data collection and the necessity to include additional citation sources. Clarivate Analytics may need to consider integrating all citation sources for more accurate JIF values. Alternatively, Google Scholar could potentially develop its own journal or citation impact based on its extensive journal citation records.
    Date: 2024–01–31
    URL: https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:osfxxx:8g67q_v1
  3. By: Henderson, Emma Louise (University of Surrey); Darby, Robert; Farran, Emily Kate
    Abstract: Assessment of potential academic staff members is necessary for making recruitment decisions. Amidst growing concern over the use of inappropriate quantitative indicators for research and researcher evaluation, institutions have begun to reform their policies to emphasise broader, responsible researcher assessment. To help implement such reforms, here we share a best practice Responsible Research(er) Recruitment Checklist for engaging with the principles of responsible research assessment in the writing of recruitment materials such as job adverts for research and academic roles. Aligned with the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) principles, the checklist provides guidance on how to emphasise the primacy of research content and researcher contributions to published articles, without reliance on journal-based metrics. The checklist also recommends that evaluations consider a broad range of research outputs, and that collaboration, citizenship, author contributions, and Open Research practices be recognised. At the time of writing, the checklist is being piloted.
    Date: 2023–11–21
    URL: https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:osfxxx:2kgny_v1
  4. By: Henderson, Emma Louise (University of Surrey); Jacobs, Neil; Farran, Emily Kate
    Abstract: In an era characterised by unprecedented global challenges, Open Research practices have emerged as a powerful catalyst for research quality, transparency, and collaboration. Open Research need not be in tension with other drivers such as commercialisation, privacy, or national security, and it can boost institutional reputation and income. This briefing note sets out why Open Research should be a strategic imperative for institutions seeking to thrive in a dynamic academic landscape. Note: for a PDF of the document see V1, for a Word version see V2.
    Date: 2023–11–22
    URL: https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:osfxxx:afgh5_v1
  5. By: Paulo Morceiro; Ron Boschma; Pierre-Alex Balland
    Abstract: Universities lack a comprehensive view of their entire research portfolio when looking for opportunities in new research fields and searching for collaboration partners. The paper presents an analytical framework, building on the principle of relatedness, that aims to assess the potential of universities to extend their research portfolios, to identify potentials of collaborations with other research organizations, and to determine the extent to which universities exploit complementarities in their collaborations. We illustrate the framework presenting the case of an university alliance between three Dutch universities that aims to contribute to the circular society. Publication data are used to identify relevant scientific capabilities of the universities to promote the circular society, in what research fields complementarities can be identified between partners, and to what extent partners exploit those complementarities in terms of co-publications.
    Keywords: scientific portfolio of universities, scientific capabilities, scientific complementarities, inter-university collaborations, circular society
    JEL: J24 J82 R11 O15
    Date: 2025–02
    URL: https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:egu:wpaper:2506

This nep-sog issue is ©2025 by Jonas Holmström. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at https://nep.repec.org. For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <director@nep.repec.org>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.