IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nea/journl/y2011i12p194-197.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Mission of an Economic Journal and the Institution of Refereeing

Author

Listed:
  • Polterovich, V.

    (Central Economics and Mathematics Institute RAS, Moscow, Russia
    Moscow School of Economics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia)

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Polterovich, V., 2011. "The Mission of an Economic Journal and the Institution of Refereeing," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, issue 12, pages 194-197.
    • Handle: RePEc:nea:journl:y:2011:i:12:p:194-197
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econorus.org/repec/journl/2011-12-194-197r.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel S. Hamermesh, 1994. "Facts and Myths about Refereeing," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 153-163, Winter.
    2. Daniel S. Hamermesh, 1992. "The Young Economist's Guide to Professional Etiquette," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(1), pages 169-179, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Minakir, P., 2019. "Economic magazines in the interior of a competitive market," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 44(4), pages 210-216.
    2. Kleiner, G., 2019. "Economy, economic science and economic journals," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 44(4), pages 217-224.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John Creedy, 2005. "From Manuscript to Publication : A Brief Guide for Economists," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 934, The University of Melbourne.
    2. Craig Freeman, 2000. "Do Economic Journals Obey Economic Prescriptions?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 17(4), pages 371-384, December.
    3. Amanda H Goodall, 2005. "Should Research Universities be Led by Top Researchers? Part 1: Are they?," HEW 0506003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Cloos, Janis & Greiff, Matthias & Rusch, Hannes, 2020. "Geographical Concentration and Editorial Favoritism within the Field of Laboratory Experimental Economics (RM/19/029-revised-)," Research Memorandum 014, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    5. Jac C. Heckelman, 2017. "Tullock on the organization of scientific inquiry," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 1-17, March.
    6. Bruno Frey, 2005. "Problems with Publishing: Existing State and Solutions," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 173-190, April.
    7. David J. Pannell, 2002. "Prose, Psychopaths and Persistence: Personal Perspectives on Publishing," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 50(2), pages 101-115, July.
    8. Adams, Renée B. & Ferreira, Daniel, 2008. "Do directors perform for pay?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 154-171, September.
    9. Ofer H. Azar, 2006. "The Academic Review Process: How Can We Make it More Efficient?," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 50(1), pages 37-50, March.
    10. Faria João R & Mixon Franklin G & Upadhyaya Kamal P, 2018. "Editor Reputation and Journal Quality: The Case of Regional Economic Association Journals," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 18(1), pages 1-20, January.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. Emily Chamlee-Wright & Joshua C. Hall, 2014. "Some brief syllabus advice for the young economist," Chapters, in: Franklin G. Mixon & Richard J. Cebula (ed.), New Developments in Economic Education, chapter 7, pages 76-87, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Glenn Ellison, 2002. "The Slowdown of the Economics Publishing Process," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(5), pages 947-993, October.
    15. KRAPF, Matthias & SCHLÄPFER, Jörg, 2012. "How Nobel Laureates Would Perform In The Handelsblatt Ranking," Regional and Sectoral Economic Studies, Euro-American Association of Economic Development, vol. 12(3).
    16. Frank Mueller‐Langer & Richard Watt, 2021. "Optimal pricing and quality of academic journals and the ambiguous welfare effects of forced open access: A two‐sided model," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(8), pages 1945-1959, December.
    17. Hadavand, Aboozar & Hamermesh, Daniel S. & Wilson, Wesley W., 2019. "Is Scholarly Refereeing Productive (at the Margin)?," IZA Discussion Papers 12866, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Cynthia Bansak & Allan A. Zebedee, 2023. "Getting Yourself Published: Steps and Strategies From Journal Editors," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 68(1), pages 156-162, March.
    19. Thompson, Gary D. & Aradhyula, Satheesh V. & Frisvold, George B. & Tronstad, Russell, 2004. "Does Paying Referees Expedite Reviews?," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 19988, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    20. David Card & Stefano DellaVigna, 2017. "What do Editors Maximize? Evidence from Four Leading Economics Journals," NBER Working Papers 23282, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nea:journl:y:2011:i:12:p:194-197. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Alexey Tcharykov (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nearuea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.