The Slowdown In First-Response Times Of Economics Journals: Can It Be Beneficial?
Abstract"The first-response time (henceforth FRT) of economics journals has increased over the last four decades from 2 months to 3-6 months. The optimal FRT, however, is not zero because a longer FRT deters submissions of mediocre papers to good journals and consequently saves valuable time of referees and editors. Interestingly, the change in the actual FRT is in the same direction as the change in the optimal FRT. The latter has increased because of the availability of research on the Internet prior to publication and because papers became longer and more mathematical, increasing the costs of refereeing a paper." ("JEL" L82, A10, A14, I23, A19) Copyright 2006 Western Economic Association International.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Western Economic Association International in its journal Economic Inquiry.
Volume (Year): 45 (2007)
Issue (Month): 1 (01)
Contact details of provider:
Postal: 18830 Brookhurst Street, Suite 304, Fountain Valley, CA 92708 USA
Web page: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0095-2583
More information through EDIRC
Other versions of this item:
- Azar, Ofer H., 2002. "The slowdown in first-response times of economics journals: Can it be beneficial?," MPRA Paper 4478, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- L82 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Entertainment; Media
- A19 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Other
- A14 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Sociology of Economics
- A10 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - General
- I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Yohe, Gary W, 1980. "Current Publication Lags in Economics Journals," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 18(3), pages 1050-55, September.
- Blank, Rebecca M, 1991. "The Effects of Double-Blind versus Single-Blind Reviewing: Experimental Evidence from The American Economic Review," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1041-67, December.
- Ofer H. Azar, 2005.
"The Review Process in Economics: Is it Too Fast?,"
General Economics and Teaching
- Laband, David N, 1990. "Is There Value-Added from the Review Process in Economics? Preliminary Evidence from Authors," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 105(2), pages 341-52, May.
- Ofer H. Azar, 2004. "Rejections and the importance of first response times," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 31(3), pages 259-274, March.
- Sauer, Raymond D, 1988. "Estimates of the Returns to Quality and Coauthorship in Economic Academia," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(4), pages 855-66, August.
- Juin-jen Chang & Ching-chong Lai, 2001. "Is It Worthwhile to Pay Referees?," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 68(2), pages 457-463, October.
- Trivedi, Pravin K, 1993. "An Analysis of Publication Lags in Econometrics," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(1), pages 93-100, Jan.-Marc.
- Glenn Ellison, 2000.
"Evolving Standards for Academic Publishing: A q-r Theory,"
NBER Working Papers
7805, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Glenn Ellison, 2002. "Evolving Standards for Academic Publishing: A q-r Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(5), pages 994-1034, October.
- Laband, David N & Tollison, Robert D & Karahan, Gokhan R, 2002. "Quality Control in Economics," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(3), pages 315-34.
- Engers, Maxim & Gans, Joshua S, 1998. "Why Referees Are Not Paid (Enough)," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1341-49, December.
- Moore, William J & Newman, Robert J & Turnbull, Geoffrey K, 2001. "Reputational Capital and Academic Pay," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 39(4), pages 663-71, October.
- Glenn Ellison, 2000.
"The Slowdown of the Economics Publishing Process,"
NBER Working Papers
7804, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Ofer H. Azar, 2005. "The Academic Review Process: How Can We Make it More Efficient?," General Economics and Teaching 0502069, EconWPA.
- Azar, Ofer H., 2002.
"Evolution of social norms with heterogeneous preferences: A general model and an application to the academic review process,"
4482, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Azar, Ofer H., 2008. "Evolution of social norms with heterogeneous preferences: A general model and an application to the academic review process," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 65(3-4), pages 420-435, March.
- Glenn Ellison, 2011.
"Is Peer Review In Decline?,"
Western Economic Association International, vol. 49(3), pages 635-657, 07.
- Besancenot, Damien & Vranceanu, Radu, 2008.
"Can incentives for research harm research? A business schools' tale,"
Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics),
Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 1248-1265, June.
- Besancenot, Damien & Vranceanu, Radu, 2006. "Can Incentives for Research Harm Research? A Business Schools Tale," ESSEC Working Papers DR 06003, ESSEC Research Center, ESSEC Business School.
- Barbos, Andrei, 2012.
"Imperfect Evaluation in Project Screening,"
40847, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Barbos, Andrei, 2013.
"Project screening with tiered evaluation,"
Mathematical Social Sciences,
Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 293-306.
- Ofer Azar, 2003. "Rejections and the Importance of First Response Times (Or: How Many Rejections Do Others Receive?)," General Economics and Teaching 0309002, EconWPA.
- repec:hal:cepnwp:halshs-00175384 is not listed on IDEAS
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.