How Do Editors Select Papers, and How Good are They at Doing It?
Using data on the B.E. Journals that rank articles into four quality tiers, this paper examines the accuracy of the research evaluation process in economics. We find that submissions by authors with strong publication records and authors affiliated with highly-ranked institutions are significantly more likely to be published in higher tiers. Citation success as measured by RePEc statistics also depends heavily on the overall research records of the authors. Finally and most importantly, we measure how successful the B.E. Journals’ editors and their reviewers have been at assigning articles to quality tiers. While, on average, they are able to distinguish more influential from less influential manuscripts, we also observe many assignments that are not compatible with the belief that research quality is reflected by the number of citations.
|Date of creation:||29 Sep 2011|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: D-78457 Konstanz|
Web page: http://www.wiwi.uni-konstanz.de/fb
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.wiwi.uni-konstanz.de/fb|
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.:
- J. M. C. Santos Silva & Silvana Tenreyro, 2006.
"The Log of Gravity,"
The Review of Economics and Statistics,
MIT Press, vol. 88(4), pages 641-658, November.
- Joao Santos Silva & Silvana Tenreyro, 2005. "The log of gravity," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 3744, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
- Joao Santos Silva & Silvana Tenreyro, 2005. "The Log of Gravity," CEP Discussion Papers dp0701, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
- Santos Silva, J.M.C & Tenreyro, Silvana, 2005. "The Log of Gravity," CEPR Discussion Papers 5311, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- J. Bradford De Long & Kevin Lang, .
"Are All Economic Hypotheses False?,"
J. Bradford De Long's Working Papers
_117, University of California at Berkeley, Economics Department.
- Kenneth J. Arrow & B. Douglas Bernheim & Martin S. Feldstein & Daniel L. McFadden & James M. Poterba & Robert M. Solow, 2011. "100 Years of the American Economic Review : The Top 20 Articles," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(1), pages 1-8, February.
- Daniel S. Hamermesh & Gerard A. Pfann, 2009.
"Markets for Reputation: Evidence on Quality and Quantity in Academe,"
NBER Working Papers
15527, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Hamermesh, Daniel S. & Pfann, Gerard A., 2009. "Markets for Reputation: Evidence on Quality and Quantity in Academe," IZA Discussion Papers 4610, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Hamermesh, Daniel S. & Pfann, Gerard Antonie, 2009. "Markets for Reputation: Evidence on Quality and Quantity in Academe," CEPR Discussion Papers 7603, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Coupé, Tom, 2013.
"Peer review versus citations – An analysis of best paper prizes,"
Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 295-301.
- Tom Coupe, 2010. "Peer Review versus Citations - An Analysis of Best Paper Prizes," Discussion Papers 35, Kyiv School of Economics.
- Gourieroux, Christian & Monfort, Alain & Trognon, Alain, 1984.
"Pseudo Maximum Likelihood Methods: Applications to Poisson Models,"
Econometric Society, vol. 52(3), pages 701-20, May.
- Gourieroux Christian & Monfort Alain & Trognon A, 1982. "Pseudo maximum lilelihood methods : applications to poisson models," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Couverture Orange) 8203, CEPREMAP.
- Benjamin F. Jones, 2005.
"The burden of knowledge and the ‘death of the Renaissance man’: Is innovation getting harder?,"
Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
- Benjamin F. Jones, 2009. "The Burden of Knowledge and the "Death of the Renaissance Man": Is Innovation Getting Harder?," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 76(1), pages 283-317.
- Benjamin F. Jones, 2005. "The Burden of Knowledge and the 'Death of the Renaissance Man': Is Innovation Getting Harder?," NBER Working Papers 11360, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- 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.
- 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.
- Heinrich W. Ursprung & Markus Zimmer, 2007. "Who is the "Platz-Hirsch" of the German Economics Profession? A Citation Analysis," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), Justus-Liebig University Giessen, Department of Statistics and Economics, vol. 227(2), pages 187-208, April.
- Daniel S. Hamermesh, 1994. "Facts and Myths about Refereeing," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 153-163, Winter.
- Christian Zimmermann, 2007.
"Academic Rankings with RePEc,"
2007-36, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics, revised Mar 2009.
- David N. Laband & Robert D. Tollison, 2003. "Dry Holes in Economic Research," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(2), pages 161-173, 05.
- Wall Howard J, 2009. "Don't Get Skewed Over by Journal Rankings," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, August.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:knz:dpteco:1137. 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: (Dr. Lisa Green)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.