|
on Sociology of Economics |
|
Issue of 2014‒04‒18
three papers chosen by Jonas Holmström Swedish School of Economics and Business Administration |
| By: | Marcella Corsi; Giulia Zacchia |
| Abstract: | The aim of this paper is to offer a contribution to the analysis of the under-representation of women economists in academic positions in Italy, focusing on publications. In Italy women’s proportion of PhDs in Economics and Statistics has increased from 39 to 52 per cent in the last decade. Despite this progressive feminization of doctoral degrees in economics, the share of women working as academic staff in departments of Economics at Italian universities is still low: women constitute 28.1% of academic economists in Italy; in particular, women account for 16% of full professors and 27% of associate professors (data for 2010). The much-debated reform of the Italian university system (so called ‘Gelmini’ reform) is stressing the importance of ‘merit evaluation’ for academics and consequently it is supporting the use of bibliometric indicators for the purposes of selection. In this context, we aim to assess whether the systematic differences between Italian men and women in terms of academic career in economics, can be explained by their productivity in the last ten years. In order to do so, we first study, from a gender perspective, how the profile of economists who have become full professors in the last decade has changed in terms of individual characteristics and scientific productivity. Then, we study gender differences in the scientific output of academic economists since 2001, in order to find out about differences between men and women and completethe picture of the gender gap in career for economists in the Italian University. |
| JEL: | J16 J70 D72 |
| Date: | 2014–04–14 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:sol:wpaper:2013/159748&r=sog |
| By: | Alberto Baccini; Lucio Barabesi; Martina Cioni; Caterina Pisani |
| Abstract: | An original dataset referring to a medium-sized Italian university is implemented for analyzing the determinants of scientific research production at individual level. Three different indicators, based on the number of publications and/or citations, are considered. Their distributions are highly skewed, displaying an excess of zero-valued observations, thus zero-inflated and hurdle regression models are introduced. Among them, the Hurdle Negative Binomial model exhibits a good fitting and appears to be reasonably coherent with the underlying generating data process. Indeed, the performance of active researchers is described by the count component of the model, while the odds to be in a non-active status is modelled by the zero component. Individual characteristics, teaching and administrative activities, as well as the features of the department the researcher belongs to, are considered as explanatory variables. The analysis of the results highlights that scientific productivity is lower for oldest active researchers, and that there is a significant effect of academic position on research production. Evidence of clear-cut and significant substitution or complementarity effect between teaching and research activities is not found. Indeed, a major teaching load does not apparently affect the odds to be a non-active researcher, while it has mixed and very weak effects on publication performance of active researchers. A negative relationship among productivity and administrative tasks is highlighted. Finally, the analysis points out the effects of department composition on both the odds to be non-active and the value of the production indicators of active researchers. |
| Keywords: | Academic research productivity, Scientist productivity, Hurdle models, Zero-Inflated models, Negative Binomial distribution, Poisson distribution |
| Date: | 2013–12 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:usi:wpaper:691&r=sog |
| By: | Besancenot, Damien (University of Paris 13 and CEPN); Vranceanu, Radu (ESSEC Business School and THEMA) |
| Abstract: | In April 2013, all of the major academic publishing houses moved thousands of journal titles to an original hybrid model, under which authors of accepted papers can choose between an expensive open access track and the traditional track available only to subscribers. This paper argues that authors might use publication strategy as a quality signaling device. The imperfect information game between authors and readers presents several types of Perfect Bayesian Equilibria, including a separating equilibrium in which only authors of high quality papers are driven toward the open access track. The publishing house will choose the open-access publication fee that supports the emergence of the highest return equilibrium. Journal structures will evolve over time according to the journals' accessibility - quality profiles. |
| Keywords: | Academic publishing; Open access; Knowledge di¤usion; Imperfect information; Signaling |
| JEL: | A14 D52 L23 |
| Date: | 2014–03 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ebg:essewp:dr-14006&r=sog |