IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/45384.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Failure in the market for reviewing economics papers: Good readers, bad referees, and ugly papers

Author

Listed:
  • Hatzinikolaou, Dimitris

Abstract

The paper discusses the problem of incompetent and/or irresponsible refereeing of scientific papers, with emphasis on economics papers. To illustrate, I describe my own confrontation with erroneous published papers, and demonstrate that writing comments on such papers does not always solve the problem. Finally, based on previously suggested as well as on currently used solutions, I propose a change in the review process by abolishing referee anonymity and letting the authors appeal publicly if they think their papers have been evaluated improperly. This change will render the process self-correcting.

Suggested Citation

  • Hatzinikolaou, Dimitris, 2012. "Failure in the market for reviewing economics papers: Good readers, bad referees, and ugly papers," MPRA Paper 45384, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 26 Sep 2012.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:45384
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/45384/1/MPRA_paper_45384.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Deirdre N. McCloskey & Stephen T. Ziliak, 1996. "The Standard Error of Regressions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(1), pages 97-114, March.
    3. Kao, Chihwa, 1999. "Spurious regression and residual-based tests for cointegration in panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 1-44, May.
    4. Dimitris Hatzinikolaou, 2000. "Sensitivity of consumption to income and to government purchases: some specification and estimation issues," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(6), pages 767-775.
    5. 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.
    6. Frey, Bruno S, 2003. "Publishing as Prostitution?--Choosing between One's Own Ideas and Academic Success," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 116(1-2), pages 205-223, July.
    7. Dimitris Hatzinikolaou, 2010. "Econometric Errors in an _Applied Economics_ Article," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 7(2), pages 107-112, May.
    8. Athanasia Mavrommati & Athanasios Papadopoulos, 2005. "Measuring advertising intensity and intangible capital in the Greek food industry," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(15), pages 1777-1787.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Review process; referee anonymity; causality; endogeneity; spurious regression;

    JEL classification:

    • A11 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Role of Economics; Role of Economists
    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology
    • C51 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Construction and Estimation

    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:pra:mprapa:45384. 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: (Joachim Winter). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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 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.

    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.