IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/wpaper/halshs-00564982.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Collective attention and ranking methods

Author

Listed:
  • Gabrielle Demange

    (PSE - Paris-Jourdan Sciences Economiques - ENS-PSL - École normale supérieure - Paris - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - ENPC - École des Ponts ParisTech - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, PSE - Paris School of Economics - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - ENS-PSL - École normale supérieure - Paris - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - ENPC - École des Ponts ParisTech - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement)

Abstract

In a world with a tremendous amount of choices, ranking systems are becoming increasingly important in helping individuals to find information relevant to them. As such, rankings play a crucial role of influencing the attention that is devoted to the various alternatives. This role generates a feedback when the ranking is based on citations, as is the case for PageRank used by Google. The attention bias due to published rankings affects new stated opinions (citations), which will, in turn, affect the next ranking. The purpose of this paper is to investigate this feedback by studying some simple but reasonable dynamics. We show that the long run behavior of the process much depends on the preferences, in particular on their diversity, and on the used ranking method. Two main families of methods are investigated, one based on the notion of 'handicaps', the other one on the notion of peers' rankings.

Suggested Citation

  • Gabrielle Demange, 2012. "Collective attention and ranking methods," Working Papers halshs-00564982, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:halshs-00564982
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00564982v2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00564982v2/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ignacio Palacios-Huerta & Oscar Volij, 2004. "The Measurement of Intellectual Influence," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(3), pages 963-977, May.
    2. de Clippel, Geoffroy & Moulin, Herve & Tideman, Nicolaus, 2008. "Impartial division of a dollar," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 176-191, March.
    3. Demange,Gabrielle & Wooders,Myrna (ed.), 2005. "Group Formation in Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521842716, October.
    4. 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.
    5. AMIR, Rabah, 2002. "Impact-adjusted citations as a measure of journal quality," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2002074, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    6. Leo Katz, 1953. "A new status index derived from sociometric analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 18(1), pages 39-43, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Germano, Fabrizio & Sobbrio, Francesco, 2020. "Opinion dynamics via search engines (and other algorithmic gatekeepers)," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    2. Brink, René van den & Rusinowska, Agnieszka, 2021. "The degree ratio ranking method for directed graphs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(2), pages 563-575.
    3. Fabrizio Germano & Vicenç Gómez & Gaël Le Mens, 2019. "The few-get-richer: a surprising consequence of popularity-based rankings," Economics Working Papers 1636, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.

    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. Gabrielle Demange, 2012. "On the influence of a ranking system," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 39(2), pages 431-455, July.
    2. ,, 2014. "A ranking method based on handicaps," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(3), September.
    3. Demange, Gabrielle, 2017. "Mutual rankings," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 35-42.
    4. Gabrielle Demange, 2011. "On the influence of rankings," PSE Working Papers halshs-00589657, HAL.
    5. Pantelis Kalaitzidakis & Theofanis P. Mamuneas & Thanasis Stengos, 2011. "An updated ranking of academic journals in economics," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 44(4), pages 1525-1538, November.
    6. Du, Ye & Lehrer, Ehud & Pauzner, Ady, 2015. "Competitive economy as a ranking device over networks," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 1-13.
    7. Brozos-Vázquez, Miguel & Campo-Cabana, Marco Antonio & Díaz-Ramos, José Carlos & González-Díaz, Julio, 2008. "Ranking participants in tournaments by means of rating functions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(11), pages 1246-1256, December.
    8. Rabah Amir & Malgorzata Knauff, 2008. "Ranking Economics Departments Worldwide on the Basis of PhD Placement," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 90(1), pages 185-190, August.
    9. David L. Anderson & John Tressler, 2013. "The Relevance of the “h-” and “g-” Index to Economics in the Context of A Nation-Wide Research Evaluation Scheme: The New Zealand Case," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 32(1), pages 81-94, March.
    10. Ignacio Palacios-Huerta & Oscar Volij, 2004. "The Measurement of Intellectual Influence," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(3), pages 963-977, May.
    11. Rene van den Brink & Agnieszka Rusinowska, "undated". "The Degree Ratio Ranking Method for Directed Networks," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 19-026/II, Tinbergen Institute.
    12. J. A. García & Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez & J. Fdez-Valdivia & J. Martinez-Baena, 2012. "On first quartile journals which are not of highest impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(3), pages 925-943, March.
    13. Dequiedt, Vianney & Zenou, Yves, 2017. "Local and consistent centrality measures in parameterized networks," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 28-36.
    14. de Marti, Joan & Zenou, Yves, 2009. "Social Networks," Working Paper Series 816, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    15. Coralio Ballester & Antoni Calvó-Armengol & Yves Zenou, 2006. "Who's Who in Networks. Wanted: The Key Player," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(5), pages 1403-1417, September.
    16. Yong Bao & Melody Lo & Franklin G. Mixon, 2010. "General-interest versus specialty journals: Using intellectual influence of econometrics research to rank economics journals and articles," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(2), pages 345-353.
    17. Francis Bloch & Matthew O. Jackson & Pietro Tebaldi, 2023. "Centrality measures in networks," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 61(2), pages 413-453, August.
    18. Antonio García-Romero & Daniel Santín & Gabriela Sicilia, 2016. "Another brick in the wall: a new ranking of academic journals in Economics using FDH," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(1), pages 91-101, April.
    19. van den Brink, René & Rusinowska, Agnieszka, 2022. "The degree measure as utility function over positions in graphs and digraphs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 299(3), pages 1033-1044.
    20. Balázs Sziklai, 2018. "How to identify experts in a community?," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(1), pages 155-173, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Ranking; Scoring; Invariant method; Peers' method; Attention; Handicap; Scaling matrix; Dynamics through influence;
    All these keywords.

    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:hal:wpaper:halshs-00564982. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.