This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Are Leading Papers of Better Quality? Evidence from a Natural Experiment

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Tom Coupé
Victor Ginsburgh
Abdul Noury

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

Abstract

Leading papers in a journal’s issue attract, on average, more citations than those that follow. It is, however, difficult to assess whether they are of better quality (as is often suggested), or whether this happens just because they appear first in an issue. We make use of a natural experiment that was carried out by a journal in which papers are randomly ordered in some issues, while this order is not random in others. We show that leading papers in randomly ordered issues also attract more citations, which casts some doubt on whether, in general, leading papers are of higher quality.

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.

File URL: http://164.15.69.62/index2.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_view&gid=28&Itemid=204
File Format: application/pdf
File Function: First version, 2008
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Université Libre de Bruxelles, Ecares in its series ECARES Working Papers with number 2008_014.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length: 16 pages
Date of creation: 2008
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:eca:wpaper:2008_014

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Av. F.D., Roosevelt, 39, 1050 Bruxelles
Phone: (32 2) 650 30 75
Fax: (32 2) 650 44 75
Web page: http://www.ecares.org/
More information through EDIRC

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

Related research
Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports: This item is featured on the following reading lists:
  1. Economic Logic blog
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.)
  1. Oswald, Andrew J., 2008. "Can We Test for Bias in Scientific Peer-Review?," IZA Discussion Papers 3665, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA). [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? To receive notification of recent additions to the database, subscribe to the free NEP reports.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-18.

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.