Failure in the market for reviewing economics papers: Good readers, bad referees, and ugly papers
AbstractThe paper discusses the problem of incompetent and/or irresponsible refereeing of scientific papers, with emphasis on economics papers. To illustrate, I describe my own confrontation with erroneous published papers, and demonstrate that writing comments on such papers does not always solve the problem. Finally, based on previously suggested as well as on currently used solutions, I propose a change in the review process by abolishing referee anonymity and letting the authors appeal publicly if they think their papers have been evaluated improperly. This change will render the process self-correcting.
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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 45384.
Date of creation: 15 Sep 2012
Date of revision: 26 Sep 2012
Publication status: Published in International Journal of Management Studies, Statistics & Applied Economics 2.2(2012): pp. 163-176
Review process; referee anonymity; causality; endogeneity; spurious regression;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- A11 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Role of Economics; Role of Economists
- B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology
- C51 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Construction and Estimation
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.:
- repec:dar:vpaper:24662 is not listed on IDEAS
- Athanasia Mavrommati & Athanasios Papadopoulos, 2005. "Measuring advertising intensity and intangible capital in the Greek food industry," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(15), pages 1777-1787.
- Deirdre N. McCloskey & Stephen T. Ziliak, 1996. "The Standard Error of Regressions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(1), pages 97-114, March.
- Frey, Bruno S, 2003. " Publishing as Prostitution?--Choosing between One's Own Ideas and Academic Success," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 116(1-2), pages 205-23, July.
- Joshua S. Gans & George B. Shepherd, 1994. "How Are the Mighty Fallen: Rejected Classic Articles by Leading Economists," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 165-179, Winter.
- Dimitris Hatzinikolaou, 2000. "Sensitivity of consumption to income and to government purchases: some specification and estimation issues," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(6), pages 767-775.
- Kao, Chihwa, 1999. "Spurious regression and residual-based tests for cointegration in panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 1-44, May.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.