IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/3rcdn.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How has Mainstream changed? A Topic Model insight

Author

Listed:
  • Redigonda, Margherita

Abstract

This paper has two aims: to explore the suitability of computational tools in order to get a description of long-term evolution of mainstream economics and to test the "mainstream pluralism" hypothesis. A topic model is developed using full-text from papers published in a sample of top economics journals and the hierarchical Stochastic Block Model algorithm. The model is able to replicate many qualitative facts about the history of mainstream economics. Finally, the reason of the failure to test for the "mainstream pluralism" hypothesis are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Redigonda, Margherita, 2023. "How has Mainstream changed? A Topic Model insight," OSF Preprints 3rcdn, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:3rcdn
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/3rcdn
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6575fa8874f3611cb82e4482/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/3rcdn?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kim, E. Han & Morse, Adair & Zingales, Luigi, 2009. "Are elite universities losing their competitive edge?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(3), pages 353-381, September.
    2. Malouin, Jean-Louis & -Francois Outreville, J., 1987. "The relative impact of economics journals: A cross-country survey and comparison," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 267-277, August.
    3. Jean Heck & Peter Zaleski, 2006. "The most frequent contributors to the elite economics journals: Half century of contributions to the “Blue ribbon eight”," Journal of Economics and Finance, Springer;Academy of Economics and Finance, vol. 30(1), pages 1-37, March.
    4. William J. Moore, 1972. "The Relative Quality Of Economics Journals: A Suggested Rating System," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 10(2), pages 156-169, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:osf:osfxxx:3rcdn_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Klaus Wohlrabe, 2016. "Taking the Temperature: A Meta-Ranking of Economics Journals," CESifo Working Paper Series 5726, CESifo.
    3. Tolga Yuret, 2020. "Co-worker network: How closely are researchers who published in the top five economics journals related?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 2301-2317, September.
    4. Lutz Bornmann & Alexander Butz & Klaus Wohlrabe, 2018. "What are the top five journals in economics? A new meta-ranking," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(6), pages 659-675, February.
    5. David Figlio, 1994. "Trends in the Publication of Empirical Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(3), pages 179-187, Summer.
    6. Pontille, David & Torny, Didier, 2010. "Revues qui comptent, revues qu’on compte :produire des classements en économie et gestion," Revue de la Régulation - Capitalisme, institutions, pouvoirs, Association Recherche et Régulation, vol. 8.
    7. Mirucki, Jean & Nicot, Bernadette & Poshyvak, Maria, 2007. "What Can EconLit Reveal Us About Ukraine's Scholarly Production?," MPRA Paper 27717, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Hyuk-Soo Kwon & Jihong Lee & Sokbae Lee & Ryungha Oh, 2022. "Knowledge spillovers and patent citations: trends in geographic localization, 1976–2015," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(3), pages 123-147, April.
    9. Fabian Waldinger, 2012. "Peer Effects in Science: Evidence from the Dismissal of Scientists in Nazi Germany," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 79(2), pages 838-861.
    10. Pedro Cosme Vieira & Aurora A. C. Teixeira, 2010. "Are finance, management, and marketing autonomous fields of scientific research? An analysis based on journal citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(3), pages 627-646, December.
    11. Christiane Hellmanzik, Department of Economics and IIIS, Trinity College Dublin, 2009. "Artistic Clusters and Modern Artists’ Mobility - An Empirical Study," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp296, IIIS.
    12. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2017. "Digital knowledge generation and the appropriability trade-off," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 991-1002.
    13. Dubois, Pierre & Rochet, Jean-Charles & Schlenker, Jean-Marc, 2010. "What Does It Take to Become a Good Mathematician?," TSE Working Papers 10-160, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    14. Carillo, Maria Rosaria & Papagni, Erasmo & Sapio, Alessandro, 2013. "Do collaborations enhance the high-quality output of scientific institutions? Evidence from the Italian Research Assessment Exercise," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 25-36.
    15. Carrasco, Raquel & Ruiz-Castillo, Javier, 2016. "The gender productivity gap : some evidence for a set of highly productive academic economists," UC3M Working papers. Economics 23525, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    16. Hellmanzik, Christiane, 2016. "Historic art exhibitions and modern - day auction results," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 421-430.
    17. E. Han Kim & Min Zhu, 2010. "Universities as Firms: The Case of US Overseas Programs," NBER Chapters, in: American Universities in a Global Market, pages 163-201, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Keith Head & Yao Amber Li & Asier Minondo, 2019. "Geography, Ties, and Knowledge Flows: Evidence from Citations in Mathematics," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 101(4), pages 713-727, October.
    19. Clément Bosquet & Pierre-Philippe Combes, 2013. "Do Large Departments Make Academics More Productive? Agglomeration and Peer Effects in Research," SERC Discussion Papers 0133, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    20. Clément Bosquet & Pierre-Philippe Combes & Emeric Henry & Thierry Mayer, 2022. "Peer Effects in Academic Research: Senders and Receivers," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(648), pages 2644-2673.
    21. Ho Fai Chan & Vincent Lariviére & Naomi Moy & Ali Sina Önder & Donata Schilling & Benno Torgler, 2021. "East German Science After Communism: Why does Westernization correlate with Productivity," Working Papers in Economics & Finance 2021-09, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth Business School, Economics and Finance Subject Group, revised 30 Jun 2022.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    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:osf:osfxxx:3rcdn. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.