IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Journal Weighting Scheme Characteristics on Research Output Measurement in Economics: The New Zealand Case


  • David L. Anderson
  • John Tressler


In this study we test for the ‘power’ or aggressiveness of various journal weighting schemes, especially those based on the recursive adjustment methodology first developed by Liebowitz and Palmer. Using data generated by New Zealand’s academic economists, we provide quantitative measures of the differences between recursive adjustment-based schemes and selected alternatives. We then compare the performance of economics departments under each of our journal weighting schemes and, for comparison purposes, one based on direct citation counts. We find departmental rankings based on selected recursive adjustment schemes to be relatively stable, but these rankings differed substantially from those generated by our alternative schemes. This suggests that departmental hiring practices and research strategies must be sensitive to the type of funding scheme employed. In particular, research on domestic and regional issues is likely to be unattractive to researchers if a high-powered journal weighting scheme is adopted as the “official” standard since regional journals, the natural outlet for such work, are frequently zero-weighted by such schemes.

Suggested Citation

  • David L. Anderson & John Tressler, 2012. "The Impact of Journal Weighting Scheme Characteristics on Research Output Measurement in Economics: The New Zealand Case," Review of Economics and Institutions, Università di Perugia, vol. 3(3).
  • Handle: RePEc:pia:review:v:3:y:2012:i:3:n:4

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Requires registration. Users must be registered and log in to access full text

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item


    Economics Departments; Research Output; Research Assessment Measures; Citations; Impact factors;

    JEL classification:

    • A14 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Sociology of Economics
    • C81 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Methodology for Collecting, Estimating, and Organizing Microeconomic Data; Data Access
    • J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pia:review:v:3:y:2012:i:3:n:4. 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: (Ubaldo Pizzoli). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.