Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Attention and the art of scientific publishing

Contents:

Author Info

  • Arjo Klamer
  • Hendrik van Dalen

Abstract

As so many other activities nowadays, modern science revolves around the competition for attention. Unlike in so many other attention games, in science those who seek attention are more or less the same people who are giving it. An important characteristic is the skewness of the distribution of scientific attention. We discuss the effect these characteristics have on scientific institutions. An important thesis of ours is that scientists converge in clusters of likeminded scientists. Given the character of scientific organization and communication we expect that the digitalization of scientific communication will not affect the basic scientific institutions as the principles upon which the Internet functions coincide more or less with the way science functions. However, violation of these principles can in principle disrupt science and fundamentally change its character. Diversity, the key element of scientific conversation, may be destroyed.

Download Info

If 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.
File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1350178022000015104
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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 Info

Article provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Journal of Economic Methodology.

Volume (Year): 9 (2001)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
Pages: 289-315

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:taf:jecmet:v:9:y:2001:i:3:p:289-315

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJEC20

Order Information:
Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RJEC20

Related research

Keywords: Attention; Publishing; Journals; Citations; Networks;

Other versions of this item:

References

References listed on IDEAS
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.:
as in new window
  1. Aloysius Siow, 1991. "Are First Impressions Important in Academia?," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 26(2), pages 236-255.
  2. Rosen, Sherwin, 1981. "The Economics of Superstars," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(5), pages 845-58, December.
  3. MacDonald, Glenn M, 1988. "The Economics of Rising Stars," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(1), pages 155-66, March.
  4. Stigler, George J & Stigler, Stephen M & Friedland, Claire, 1995. "The Journals of Economics," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(2), pages 331-59, April.
  5. David M. Levy, 1988. "The Market for Fame and Fortune," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 20(4), pages 615-625, Winter.
  6. Josh Lerner & Jean Triole, 2000. "The Simple Economics of Open Source," NBER Working Papers 7600, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  7. David Colander, 1994. "Vision, judgment, and disagreement among economists," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(1), pages 43-56.
  8. Scott Smart & Joel Waldfogel, 1996. "A Citation-Based Test for Discrimination at Economics and Finance Journals," NBER Working Papers 5460, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  9. Hodgson, Geoffrey M & Rothman, Harry, 1999. "The Editors and Authors of Economics Journals: A Case of Institutional Oligopoly?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(453), pages F165-86, February.
  10. Hendrik P. Dalen & Kène Henkens, 1999. "How Influential Are Demography Journals?," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 25(2), pages 229-251.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Josef Falkinger, 2008. "Limited Attention as a Scarce Resource in Information-Rich Economies," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(532), pages 1596-1620, October.
  2. Hendrik P. Van Dalen & Kène Henkens, 2012. "What is on a Demographer’s Mind?," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 26(16), pages 363-408, May.
  3. Josef Falkinger, 2007. "Distribution and Use of Knowledge under the “Laws of the Web”," CESifo Working Paper Series 2154, CESifo Group Munich.
  4. Dalen, H.P. van, 2007. "Pluralism in economics: A public good or a public bad?," Open Access publications from Tilburg University urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-347616, Tilburg University.
  5. Yalcintas, Altug, 2013. "The Oomph in economic philosophy: a bibliometric analysis of the main trends, from the 1960s to the present," MPRA Paper 44191, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  6. Hendrik P. van Dalen & K�ne Henkens, 2004. "Signals in Science - On the Importance of Signaling in Gaining Attention in Science," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 04-113/1, Tinbergen Institute.
  7. Timo Boppart & Kevin E. Staub, 2012. "Online accessibility of academic articles and the diversity of economics," ECON - Working Papers 075, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
  8. Klaus Mohn, 2010. "Autism in Economics? A Second Opinion," Forum for Social Economics, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 191-208, July.
  9. Rajeev Goel & Christoph Grimpe, 2013. "Active versus passive academic networking: evidence from micro-level data," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 116-134, April.
  10. João Faria & Rajeev Goel, 2010. "Returns to networking in academia," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 103-117, July.
  11. Falkinger, Josef, 2005. "Limited Attention as the Scarce Resource in an Information-Rich Economy," IZA Discussion Papers 1538, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  12. Huberman, Bernardo & Wu, Fang, 2006. "Comparative Advante and Efficient Advertising in the Attention Economy," MPRA Paper 928, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  13. Pedro Cosme Vieira & Aurora A.C. Teixeira, 2006. "Are Finance, Management, and Marketing Autonomous Fields of Scientific Research? An Analysis Based on Journal Citations," FEP Working Papers 233, Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto.
  14. Hendrik P. van Dalen & Arjo Klamer, 2005. "Is there such a Thing called Scientific Waste?," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 05-005/1, Tinbergen Institute.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jecmet:v:9:y:2001:i:3:p:289-315. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty).

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.