Signals in Science - On the Importance of Signaling in Gaining Attention in Science

This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data

Signals in Science - On the Importance of Signaling in Gaining Attention in Science

Author Info

Hendrik P. van Dalen () (Faculty of Economics, Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam)
Kène Henkens () (Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute, The Hague)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Hendrik P. van Dalen

Abstract

Which signals are important in gaining attention in science? For a group of 1,371 scientific articles published in 17 demography journals in the years 1990-1992 we track their influence and discern which signals are important in receiving citations. Three types of signals are examined: the author’s reputation (as producer of the idea), the journal (as the broker of the idea), and the state of uncitedness (as an indication of the assessment by the scientific community of an idea). The empirical analysis points out that, first, the reputation of journals plays an overriding role in gaining attention in science. Second, in contrast to common wisdom, the state of uncitedness does not affect the future probability of being cited. And third, the reputation of a journal may help to get late recognition (so-called ‘sleeping beauties’) as well as generate so-called ‘flash-in-the-pans’: immediately noted articles but apparently not very influential in the long run.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. 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.

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Tinbergen Institute in its series Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers with number 04-113/1.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 26 Oct 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:dgr:uvatin:20040113

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.tinbergen.nl/

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Walther Schoonenberg).

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
C41 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Duration Analysis
D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search, Learning, and Information
O31 - Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth - - Technological Change - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
O33 - Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth - - Technological Change - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

NEP-ALL-2004-11-22 (All new papers)
NEP-MIC-2004-11-22 (Microeconomics)

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.:

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. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Hamermesh, Daniel S, 1994. "Facts and Myths about Refereeing," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 153-63, Winter. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Hendrik P. van Dalen & Kene Henkens, 2000. "What makes a Scientific Article influential?," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 00-032/1, Tinbergen Institute. [Downloadable!]
Arjo Klamer & Hendrik P. van Dalen, 2002. "Attention and the art of scientific publishing," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 9(3), pages 289-315, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Other versions:
- Arjo Klamer & Hendrik P. van Dalen, 2001. "Attention and the Art of Scientific Publishing," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 01-022/1, Tinbergen Institute. [Downloadable!]
Siow, Aloysius, 1997. "Some evidence on the signalling role of research in academia," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 271-276, July. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Paula E. Stephan, 1996. "The Economics of Science," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(3), pages 1199-1235, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Akerlof, George A, 1970. "The Market for 'Lemons': Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 84(3), pages 488-500, August. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
David N. Laband & Robert D. Tollison, 2003. "Dry Holes in Economic Research," Kyklos, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 56(2), pages 161-173, 05. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Gans, Joshua S & Shepherd, George B, 1994. "How Are the Mighty Fallen: Rejected Classic Articles by Leading Economists," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 165-79, Winter. [Downloadable!] (restricted)

Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, 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.)

Hendrik P. van Dalen & Arjo Klamer, 2005. "Is there such a Thing called Scientific Waste?," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 05-005/1, Tinbergen Institute. [Downloadable!]

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Did you know? The RePEc project started in 1997. Its precursor, NetEc, dates back to 1993.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-19.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.