Why Has Critical Commentary Been Curtailed at Top Economics Journals? A Reply to Robert Whaples
IN OUR ARTICLE WITH FREDERICK DE WORKEN-ELEY III IN THE April 2005 issue of this Journal, we documented the decline in critical commentary (i.e., comments, replies, rejoinders) that occurred between 1963 and 2004 in the top general interest journals in economics. Explaining the decline was not our focus, although we lamented the decline because it makes the journals less valuable as forums for discussion.
Volume (Year): 3 (2006)
Issue (Month): 2 (May)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Enterprise Hall, Room 354, 4400 University Drive, 3G4 Fairfax, VA 22030|
Phone: (703) 993-1151
Web page: https://econjwatch.org/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Stephen T. Ziliak & Deirdre N. McCloskey, 2004.
"Size Matters: The Standard Error of Regressions in the American Economic Review,"
Econ Journal Watch,
Econ Journal Watch, vol. 1(2), pages 331-358, August.
- Ziliak, Stephen T. & McCloskey, Deirdre N., 2004. "Size matters: the standard error of regressions in the American Economic Review," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 527-546, November.
- David N. Laband & Robert D. Tollison, 2003. "Dry Holes in Economic Research," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(2), pages 161-173, 05.
- Philip R. P. Coelho & Frederick De Worken-Eley III & James E. McClure, 2005. "Decline in Critical Commentary, 1963â€“2004," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 2(2), pages 355-361, August. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)