IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

The Merits of Using Citation-Based Journal Weighting Schemes to Measure Research Performance in Economics: The Case of New Zealand

  • David L. Anderson


    (Queen's University)

  • John Tressler


    (University of Waikato)

In this study we test various citation-based journal weighting schemes, especially those based on the Liebowitz and Palmer methodology, as to their suitability for use in a nation- wide research funding model. Using data generated by New Zealand’s academic economists, we compare the performance of departments, and individuals, under each of our selected schemes; and we then proceed to contrast these results with those generated by direct citation counts. Our findings suggest that if all citations are deemed to be of equal value, then schemes based on the Liebowitz and Palmer methodology yield problematic outcomes. We also demonstrate that even between weighting schemes based on a common methodology, major differences are found to exist in departmental and individual outcomes.

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:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University of Waikato, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers in Economics with number 10/03.

in new window

Length: 25 pages
Date of creation: 13 May 2010
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:wai:econwp:10/03
Contact details of provider: Postal: Private Bag 3105, Hamilton, New Zealand, 3240
Phone: + 64 (0)7 838 4758 (Administrator)
Fax: + 64 7 838 4331
Web page:

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. David L. Anderson & John Tressler, 2009. "The Excellence in Research for Australia Scheme: An Evaluation of the Draft Journal Weights for Economics," Working Papers in Economics 09/07, University of Waikato, Department of Economics.
  2. Volij, Oscar & Palacios-Huerta, Ignacio, 2004. "The Measurment of Intellectual Influence," Staff General Research Papers 10797, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  3. Kodrzycki Yolanda K. & Yu Pingkang, 2006. "New Approaches to Ranking Economics Journals," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-44, August.
  4. Rombouts, Jeroen V. K. & Bauwens, Luc, 2004. "Econometrics," Papers 2004,33, Humboldt-Universität Berlin, Center for Applied Statistics and Economics (CASE).
  5. Bush, Winston C & Hamelman, Paul W & Staaf, Robert J, 1974. "A Quality Index for Economic Journals," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 56(1), pages 123-25, February.
  6. Liebowitz, S J & Palmer, J P, 1984. "Assessing the Relative Impacts of Economic Journals," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 77-88, March.
  7. Graves, Philip E & Marchand, James R & Thompson, Randal, 1982. "Economics Departmental Rankings: Research Incentives, Constraints, and Efficiency," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(5), pages 1131-41, December.
  8. John Gibson, 2000. "Research productivity in New Zealand university economics departments: Comment and update," New Zealand Economic Papers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(1), pages 73-87.
  9. Davis, Paul & Papanek, Gustav F, 1984. "Faculty Ratings of Major Economics Departments by Citations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(1), pages 225-30, March.
  10. Andrew J. Oswald, 2007. "An Examination of the Reliability of Prestigious Scholarly Journals: Evidence and Implications for Decision-Makers," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 74(293), pages 21-31, 02.
  11. Henrekson, Magnus & Waldenström, Daniel, 2008. "How Should Research Performance Be Measured? A Study of Swedish Economists," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 693, Stockholm School of Economics.
  12. Joseph Macri & Dipendra Sinha, 2006. "Rankings Methodology for International Comparisons of Institutions and Individuals: an Application to Economics in Australia and New Zealand," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(1), pages 111-156, 02.
  13. Kristie M. Engemann & Howard J. Wall, 2009. "A journal ranking for the ambitious economist," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue May, pages 127-140.
  14. Hirsch, Barry T, et al, 1984. "Economics Departmental Rankings: Comment [Economics Departmental Rankings: Research Incentives, Constraints, and Efficiency]," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(4), pages 822-26, September.
  15. Pantelis Kalaitzidakis & Theofanis P Mamuneas & Thanasis Stengos, 2001. "Rankings of Academic Journals and Institutions in Economics," Discussion Papers in Economics 01/8, Department of Economics, University of Leicester.
  16. 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.
  17. Tom Coupé, 2003. "Revealed Performances: Worldwide Rankings of Economists and Economics Departments, 1990-2000," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(6), pages 1309-1345, December.
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:wai:econwp:10/03. 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: (Brian Silverstone)

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.