IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

What drives the relevance and reputation of economics journals? An update from a survey among economists

  • Haucap, Justus
  • Muck, Johannes

This is paper analyses the interrelationship between perceived journal relevance and reputation. Based on a survey of 705 members of the German Economic Association, we find a strong interrelationship between journal reputation and relevance where a journal's perceived relevance has a stronger effect on the journal's reputation than vice versa. Moreover, past journal ratings conducted by the Handelsblatt and the German Economic Association (GEA) directly affect journals' reputation among German economists and indirectly also their perceived relevance, but the effect on reputation is more than twice as large as the effect on perceived relevance. In general, citations have a non-linear impact on perceived journal reputation and relevance. While the number of landmark articles published in a journal increases reputation, an increase in the so-called H-index even tends to decrease a journal's perceived relevance, as long as this is not simultaneously reflected in a higher Handelsblatt- and/or GEA-rating. We also identify significant differences in the views on journal relevance and reputation between different age groups.

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: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/80724/1/766835987.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE), University of Düsseldorf in its series DICE Discussion Papers with number 103.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 2013
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:zbw:dicedp:103
Contact details of provider: Postal:
+49 211 81-13820

Phone: +49 211 81-15494
Fax: +49 211 81-15499
Web page: http://www.dice.hhu.de/en.html
Email:


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. Esmeralda A. Ramalho & Joaquim J.S. Ramalho & José M.R. Murteira, 2009. "Alternative estimating and testing empirical strategies for fractional regression models," CEFAGE-UE Working Papers 2009_08, University of Evora, CEFAGE-UE (Portugal).
  2. Chia-Lin Chang & Philip Hans Franses & Michael McAleer & Les Oxley, 2010. "What Makes a Great Journal Great in the Sciences? Which Came First, the Chicken or the Egg?," Working Papers in Economics 10/75, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
  3. Michael Graber & Andrey Launov & Klaus Wälde, 2008. "Publish or Perish? The Increasing Importance of Publications for Prospective Economics Professors in Austria, Germany and Switzerland," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 9, pages 457-472, November.
  4. Esmeralda A. Ramalho, & Joaquim J.S. Ramalho & Pedro D. Henriques, 2010. "Fractional regression models for second stage DEA efficiency analyses," CEFAGE-UE Working Papers 2010_01, University of Evora, CEFAGE-UE (Portugal).
  5. Chia-Lin Chang & Michael McAleer & Les Oxley, 2011. "Great Expectatrics: Great Papers, Great Journals, Great Econometrics," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(6), pages 583-619.
  6. Richard Paap & Frank Kleibergen, 2004. "Generalized Reduced Rank Tests using the Singular Value Decomposition," Econometric Society 2004 Australasian Meetings 195, Econometric Society.
  7. Matthias Sutter & Martin G. Kocher, 2001. "Tools for Evaluating Research Output," Evaluation Review, SAGE Publishing, vol. 25(5), pages 555-566, October.
  8. Papke, Leslie E & Wooldridge, Jeffrey M, 1996. "Econometric Methods for Fractional Response Variables with an Application to 401(K) Plan Participation Rates," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(6), pages 619-32, Nov.-Dec..
  9. Michael Berlemann & Justus Haucap, 2012. "Which Factors Drive the Decision to Boycott and Opt Out of Research Rankings?," CESifo Working Paper Series 3997, CESifo Group Munich.
  10. Ofer H. Azar, 2005. "The Review Process in Economics: Is it Too Fast?," General Economics and Teaching 0503013, EconWPA.
  11. Glenn Ellison, 2011. "Is Peer Review In Decline?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 49(3), pages 635-657, 07.
  12. 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.
  13. Douglas Staiger & James H. Stock, 1994. "Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments," NBER Technical Working Papers 0151, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  14. David Colander & Hans Föllmer & Armin Haas & Michael Goldberg & Katarina Juselius & Alan Kirman & Thomas Lux & Brigitte Sloth, 2009. "The Financial Crisis and the Systemic Failure of Academic Economics," Kiel Working Papers 1489, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
  15. Bruno Frey, 2005. "Problems with Publishing: Existing State and Solutions," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 173-190, April.
  16. Chang, C-L. & McAleer, M.J. & Oxley, L., 2010. "What Makes a Great Journal Great in Economics? The Singer Not the Song," Econometric Institute Research Papers EI 2010-45, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Economics (ESE), Econometric Institute.
  17. White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-38, May.
  18. Oswald, Andrew J., 2006. "An Examination of the Reliability of Prestigious Scholarly Journals: Evidence and Implications for Decision-makers," IZA Discussion Papers 2070, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  19. Michael Bräuninger & Justus Haucap & Johannes Muck, 2011. "Was lesen und schätzen deutschsprachige Ökonomen heute?," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 12(4), pages 339-371, November.
  20. Clive Beed & Cara Beed, 1996. "Measuring the Quality of Academic Journals: The Case of Economics," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, M.E. Sharpe, Inc., vol. 18(3), pages 369-396, April.
  21. Glenn Ellison, 2000. "Evolving Standards for Academic Publishing: A q-r Theory," NBER Working Papers 7805, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  22. Ellis, Larry V. & Durden, Garey C., 1991. "Why economists rank their journals the way they do," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 265-270, August.
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:zbw:dicedp:103. 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics)

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.