|
on Sociology of Economics |
| By: | Damien Besancenot (CEPN - Centre d'Economie de l'Université Paris Nord - Université Paris 13 - Université Sorbonne Paris Cité (USPC) - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique); Kim Huynh (LEM - Laboratoire d'Économie Moderne - UP2 - Université Panthéon-Assas - M.E.N.E.S.R. - Ministère de l'Éducation nationale, de l’Enseignement supérieur et de la Recherche); Francisco Serranito (LEO - Laboratoire d'économie d'Orleans - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UO - Université d'Orléans, DIAL/IRD/LEDa - Développement Institutions et Mondialisation, Pôle IRD et LEDa) |
| Abstract: | This paper aims at estimating the determinants of co-authorship in economics. More specifically, we test the existence of a potential relationship between the research efficiency of an individual and that of his co-authors (the so called assortative matching hypothesis) using a novel database of French academic scholars. However, individual research productivity should be an endogenous regressor as the quality of an academic's publication will depend somehow on the quality of his co-authors. We have applied the Two Stage Residual Inclusion (2SRI) approach in order to take into account this endogeneity bias. The main empirical result is that the number and the quality of a researcher's co-authors reflect the productivity of that researcher.There is also a significant gender effect: being a woman has no impact on the probability of never collaborating with other economists but it decreases both the quality and the quantity of co-authors. Finally, lifetime cycles are also an important determinant of the co-authorship trend as the social imprinting hypothesis would suggest. So institutional changes occurred in French academia in mid-eighties have had a large impact on individual research productivity. |
| Keywords: | Co-authorship,Count Data,Zero Inflate Models,Instrumental Variables,gender productivity gap,h index |
| Date: | 2015 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:cepnwp:halshs-01252373&r=sog |
| By: | Jean-Charles Bricongne (Banque de France, LEO - Laboratoire d'économie d'Orleans - UO - Université d'Orléans - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique) |
| Abstract: | Economists’ productivity may evolve after an important award such as the John Bates Clark Medal or the “Nobel Prize”. Yet, when establishing this stylized fact through a diff-in-diff methodology by comparing the treatment group performance of award winners with the one of the control group made of other contenders, one should take into account the fact that these may also alter their productivity due to disappointment. To challenge this hypothesis, using the John Bates Clark Medal as the event likely to impact economists’ productivity, two different methods are used. The first one uses a standard diff-in-diff approach, with a treatment group made of American economists of high enough standard, using as a criterion the belonging to the American Econometrics Association, and a control group made of non-American economists of comparable standard, not fulfilling the criteria (being American, or at least established in the US) to be in a position to hope for this reward. This first approach gives mixed results. The second approach sets an innovative method to build a new treatment and control group. This latest method may be called iterative diff-in-diff: it consists in selecting, into the initial sample for the treatment group, the members of the sample who fit most the expected result, in the case of the present article, the decrease of their productivity. When comparing this sub-sample with the rest of the initial treatment sample, one tries to find a criterion, in line with the initial question raised (in the present case, the fact of attributing a high value to honors, proxied by the position of the honors section in their CV), which differentiates the two sub-samples. With this second method of iterative diff-in-diff, we find that economist who pay most attention to awards increase their productivity before the 40 year threshold of the John Bates Clark Medals and use this increased investment to keep a high productivity for a few years after the age of 40, before registering a sizeable decrease. |
| Keywords: | awards, diff-in-diff methodology, iterative diff-in-diff, John Bates Clark Medal, productivity |
| Date: | 2015 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:wpaper:halshs-01252387&r=sog |
| By: | Cléo Chassonnery-Zaïgouche |
| Abstract: | Becker’s work on discrimination is commonly viewed as one of the first expressions of “economics imperialism”. This paper challenges this view by looking at previous and later works on discrimination. Two elements define economics imperialism: the crossing of established frontiers between approaches and disciplines and the intention of substituting one approach for another. Section 1 briefly presents the origins of economics imperialism and proposes a two-aspects definition of the concept. Section 2 contextualizes Becker’s model of discrimination as imperialism “within economics” rather than towards other social sciences. Section 3 characterizes Arrow’s statistical discrimination as a humble theoretical imperialism, calling for the complementarity of social sciences rather than for the superiority of economics. Section 4 states that empirical measurements of discrimination in economics are a type of empirical imperialism essentially because these methods replace other social sciences in their contexts of expertise. |
| Keywords: | Economics imperialism, Discrimination (history of), Racial discrimination, Statistical discrimination, Becker (Gary S.), Arrow (Kenneth J.) |
| JEL: | B40 B20 A14 |
| Date: | 2015–12 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hpo:wpaper:5_2015&r=sog |