IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Negatively correlated author seniority and the number of acknowledged people: Name-recognition as a signal of scientific merit?

  • Berg, Nathan
  • Faria, Joao

Evidence from five general-interest journals in economics reveals an inverse relationship between author seniority and the number of colleagues whom authors choose to thank and acknowledge. The large seniority effect is insensitive to the inclusion of controls for the number of co-authors, number of pages, number of words in the title, and journal fixed effects. The data are consistent with the hypothesis that name-recognition is an important signal used by economists in evaluating scientific merit.

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.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6W5H-4NRMD77-1/1/fc56e9d351d8e0f7e52b4e421e07bb1f
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics).

Volume (Year): 37 (2008)
Issue (Month): 3 (June)
Pages: 1234-1247

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:37:y:2008:i:3:p:1234-1247
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/620175

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. Ofer H. Azar, 2004. "Rejections and the importance of first response times," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 31(3), pages 259-274, March.
  2. Hendrik P. van Dalen & Arjo Klamer, 2005. "Is Science A Case of Wasteful Competition?," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(3), pages 395-414, 07.
  3. Graves, Philip E & Marchand, James R & Thompson, Randal, 1982. "Economics Departmental Rankings: Research Incentives, Constraints, and Efficiency," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(5), pages 1131-41, December.
  4. Faria, Joao Ricardo, 2002. "Scientific, business and political networks in academia," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 187-198, June.
  5. Ofer H. Azar, 2005. "The Academic Review Process: How Can We Make it More Efficient?," General Economics and Teaching 0502069, EconWPA.
  6. Formby, John P & Gunther, William D & Sakano, Ryoichi, 1993. "Entry Level Salaries of Academic Economists: Does Gender or Age Matter?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 31(1), pages 128-38, January.
  7. Folster, S, 1995. "The Perils of Peer Review in Economics and Other Sciences," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 43-57, February.
  8. Laband, David N & Piette, Michael J, 1994. "Favoritism versus Search for Good Papers: Empirical Evidence Regarding the Behavior of Journal Editors," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(1), pages 194-203, February.
  9. Tom Coupé, 2004. "What Do We Know about Ourselves? on the Economics of Economics," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(2), pages 197-215, 05.
  10. Laband, David N. & Tollison, Robert D., 2003. "Good colleagues," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 505-512, December.
  11. M. Grubb, 2003. "Editorial," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(3), pages 189-190, September.
  12. Arthur M. Diamond Jr., 1986. "What is a Citation Worth?," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 21(2), pages 200-215.
  13. Daniel S. Hamermesh, 1994. "Facts and Myths about Refereeing," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 153-163, Winter.
  14. Joao Ricardo Faria, 2000. "The Game Academics Play: Editors Versus Authors," Working Paper Series 105, Finance Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney.
  15. Laband, David N & Tollison, Robert D & Karahan, Gokhan R, 2002. "Quality Control in Economics," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(3), pages 315-34.
  16. Beckmann, Martin J, 1994. "On Knowledge Networks in Science: Collaboration among Equals," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 233-42, September.
  17. Zivney, Terry L & Bertin, William J, 1992. " Publish or Perish: What the Competition Is Really Doing," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 47(1), pages 295-329, March.
  18. David N. Laband & Robert D. Tollison, 2000. "Intellectual Collaboration," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(3), pages 632-661, June.
  19. Marshall H. Medoff, 2003. "Editorial Favoritism in Economics?," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 70(2), pages 425-434, October.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:37:y:2008:i:3:p:1234-1247. 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: (Zhang, Lei)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.