|
on Sociology of Economics |
|
Issue of 2009‒12‒11
two papers chosen by Jonas Holmström Swedish School of Economics and Business Administration |
| By: | Hamermesh, Daniel S. (University of Texas at Austin); Pfann, Gerard A. (Maastricht University) |
| Abstract: | We develop a theory of the market for individual reputation, an indicator of regard by one’s peers and others. The central questions are: 1) Does the quantity of exposures raise reputation independent of their quality? and 2) Assuming that overall quality matters for reputation, does the quality of an individual’s most important exposure have an extra effect on reputation? Using evidence for academic economists, we find that, conditional on its impact, the quantity of output has no or even a negative effect on each of a number of proxies for reputation, and very little evidence that a scholar's most influential work provides any extra enhancement of reputation. Quality ranking matters more than absolute quality. Data on mobility and salaries show, on the contrary, substantial positive effects of quantity, independent of quality. We test various explanations for the differences between the determinants of reputation and salary. |
| Keywords: | mobility, quality/quantity trade-off, salary determination |
| JEL: | L14 J31 |
| Date: | 2009–12 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:iza:izadps:dp4610&r=sog |
| By: | Jim Taylor; Ian Walker |
| Abstract: | The UK's higher education funding councils have proposed reducing the number of submitted outputs from four to three in the forthcoming Research Excellence Framework to reduce the burden on panel members. This reduction is considered to be sufficient for panels to form a robust view of the achievements of individuals and their departments. The key issue is whether the subject panels would have sufficient information to judge the quality of research at departmental level with details of only three outputs per staff. Two journal quality indicators are used in this note to test the assumption that three publications is likely to be as useful to the panels as four to measure research quality in three cognate units of assessment (business & management, economics & econometrics and accounting & finance). In fact, the results indicate that two publications would be sufficient, thereby providing more time for a careful assessment of submitted outputs. |
| Keywords: | RAE Research quality Journal quality index University ranking REF |
| Date: | 2009 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:lan:wpaper:006236&r=sog |