IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

The Game Academics Play: Editors Versus Authors

  • Joao Ricardo Faria
Registered author(s):

    This paper studies a differential game between authors and editors. Authors maximize the number of publications seeking to increase the impact of their work in the literature. Editors maximize the quality of papers they publish in order to increase the reputation of their journals. The game is suitable to analyze two different scenarios. When journals have different reputations, the editors of the leading journals play as leaders while authors are the followers. When journals have the same reputation, both agents play as followers. A numerical example shows that the outcome of the first case is Pareto-superior to the second whenever editor's put more emphasis on quality vis-a-vis reputation.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.finance.uts.edu.au/research/wpapers/wp105.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Finance Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney in its series Working Paper Series with number 105.

    as
    in new window

    Length:
    Date of creation: 01 Jun 2000
    Date of revision:
    Publication status: Published as: Faria, J. R., 2005, "The Game Academics Play: Editors Versus Authors", Bulletin of Economic Research, 57(1), 1-12.
    Handle: RePEc:uts:wpaper:105
    Contact details of provider: Postal: PO Box 123, Broadway, NSW 2007, Australia
    Phone: +61 2 9514 7777
    Fax: +61 2 9514 7711
    Web page: http://www.uts.edu.au/about/uts-business-school/finance

    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.:

    as in new window
    1. Arthur M. Diamond Jr., 1986. "What is a Citation Worth?," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 21(2), pages 200-215.
    2. Hodgson, Geoffrey M & Rothman, Harry, 1999. "The Editors and Authors of Economics Journals: A Case of Institutional Oligopoly?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(453), pages F165-86, February.
    3. C. Elton Hinshaw & John J. Siegfried, 1995. "Who Gets on the AEA Program?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(1), pages 153-163, Winter.
    4. Zivney, Terry L & Bertin, William J, 1992. " Publish or Perish: What the Competition Is Really Doing," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 47(1), pages 295-329, March.
    5. Yohe, Gary W, 1980. "Current Publication Lags in Economics Journals," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 18(3), pages 1050-55, September.
    6. 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.
    7. Michael S. McPherson & Morton Owen Schapiro, 1999. "Tenure Issues in Higher Education," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 13(1), pages 85-98, Winter.
    8. Formby, John P & Gunther, William D & Sakano, Ryoichi, 1993. "Entry Level Salaries of Academic Economists: Does Gender or Age Matter?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 31(1), pages 128-38, January.
    9. Siegfried, John J., 1994. "Trends in institutional affiliation of authors who publish in the three leading general interest economics journals," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 375-386.
    10. Robison, Lindon J. & Colyer, Dale, 1994. "Reflections On Relevance Of Professional Journals," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(01), July.
    11. João Ricardo Faria, 2003. "What type of economist are you: -strategist or -strategist?," Journal of Economic Studies, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 30(2), pages 144-154, May.
    12. Jansen, Dennis W., 1991. "Ranking federal reserve system research departments by publications in professional journals," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 733-742.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:uts:wpaper:105. 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: (Duncan Ford)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.