|
on Sociology of Economics |
| By: | Robert Lehmann; Klaus Wohlrabe |
| Abstract: | In this paper we transfer the Elo rating system, which is widely accepted in chess, sports and other disciplines, to rank scientific journals. The advantage of the Elo system is the explicit consideration of the factor time or the history of a journal’s performance. Most other rankings that are commonly applied neglect this fact. The Elo ranking approach can easily be applied to any metric, published on a regular basis, to rank journals. We illustrate the approach using the SNIP indicator based on citation data from Scopus. Our balanced panel consists of 7,748 journals from many scientific fields for the period from 1999 to 2015. We show that the Elo approach produces a similar but not identical ranking compared to other rankings based on the SNIP. Especially the rank order for rather ’middle-class’ journals can tremendously change. |
| Keywords: | Elo rating system, journal rankings, SNIP |
| JEL: | A12 A14 |
| Date: | 2016 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ces:ceswps:_6259&r=sog |
| By: | Рубинштейн Александр Яковлевич; Бураков Н. А.; Славинская О. А. |
| Abstract: | Доклад является первой частью проекта «Стратификация научного сообщества экономистов и ранжирование экономических журналов», разрабатываемого временным научным коллективом ИЭ РАН и НИУ ВШЭ под эгидой Новой экономической ассоциации. В работе представлены результаты социологического опроса представителей научного сообщества экономистов, выявлена его структура и доказано отсутствие статистически значимой связи между библиометрическими показателями РИНЦ и оценками журналов, полученными на основе измерения общественного мнения. Предложен новый универсальный, алгоритм определения рейтинга анализируемых изданий. Главным итогом выполненного исследования является методологическое и инструментальное обоснование ранжирования российских экономических журналов и выделение на его основе пяти категорий периодических изданий. This report is the first part of the project «Stratification of the scientific community of economists and the ranking of economic journals», developed by the time research team of the IE RAS and the HSE under the aegis of the New Economic Association. The paper presents the results of a sociological survey of representatives of the scientific community of economists, identifies its structure and proves the absence of a statistically significant link between the bibliometric indicators of the RICC and the estimates of journals obtained on the basis of measuring public opinion. A fundamentally new, universal algorithm for determining the rating of the analyzed publications is proposed. The main result of the research is the methodological and instrumental justification for the ranking of Russian economic journals and the allocation on its basis of five categories of periodicals. |
| Keywords: | economic community, economic journals, magazine ratings, ranking of journals, bibliometric indicators, sociological survey, expert assessments, multidimensional statistical analysis, journal clusters |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:rua:wpaper:a:pru175:ye:2017:2&r=sog |
| By: | Sultan Orazbayev (UCL School of Slavonic and East European Studies) |
| Abstract: | Papers written by coauthors from different countries, on average, are published in better journals, have higher citations counts, and are evaluated more positively by peers. Similar `diversity premia' exist for inter-ethnic and inter-gender collaborations. Using data on collaborations among 34 thousand economists, this paper considers possible explanations for the positive quality-diversity correlation. After controlling for a range of relevant factors, the authors' position in the global research network plays an important role in explaining variation in the quality of collaboration, proxied by citation counts and simple impact factor of the journal in which the article is published. Access to non-redundant social ties in the global research network is associated with greater quality of the collaboration. Geographic, gender and ethnic diversity premia on collaboration quality disappear after controlling for the authors' global network position, suggesting that diversity is important only to the extent that it correlates with non-redundancy of social ties. |
| Keywords: | structural holes, diversity, collaboration networks |
| Date: | 2017–09 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:see:wpaper:2017:4&r=sog |
| By: | Richard McManus; Karen Mumford; Cristina Sechel |
| Abstract: | We investigate the selection for Lecturers into the 2014 Research Excellence Framework (REF2014) assessment exercise amongst the departments submitting to the Economics and Econometrics Unit of Assessment. Less than half of these Lecturers were submitted: 40% of the women and 53% of the men. After controlling for early career status, research output quantity and quality, co-authorship, department research ranking and location; we find more than half of the variance in selection probability is left unexplained. We also find a conditional (unexplained) gender gap in selection of 9.7%. |
| Keywords: | research excellence framework, gender, selection, outputs, quality. |
| Date: | 2017–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:yor:yorken:17/16&r=sog |
| By: | Hasan, Zubair |
| Abstract: | A group of writers in a paper published in the prestigious science journal Nature has voiced grave concern at the explosive proliferation of predatory publishing; the number of journals in the field has shot up to over 10,000 in few years. This number covers natural sciences but social studies like economics are also covered. Publications in Islamic economics finance especially, shows marked proclivity to attract the affliction. This note explores the causes of contagion, its consequences and possible remedies to curb the malady. |
| Keywords: | Predatory publishing; Econometric modeling; Islamic economics. |
| JEL: | C1 |
| Date: | 2017–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:82649&r=sog |
| By: | Karen Mumford; Cristina Sechel |
| Abstract: | We use new data to explore the determinants of pay, rank, and job satisfaction for academic economists in the UK. After allowing for a broad range of characteristics, including measures of individual productivity and workplace features, we find a raw (unconditional) gender salary difference of 15 log percentage points (lpp) and a conditional gender pay gap of 9 lpp. This aggregate pay gap is strongly influenced by the relative concentration of men in higher paid job ranks where there are also within-rank gender pay gaps. Nevertheless, the majority of academic economists (male and female) are satisfied with their job. |
| Keywords: | economics, gender, pay, satisfaction, gaps, academia. |
| JEL: | A1 A11 A2 I3 J01 J31 J7 |
| Date: | 2017–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:yor:yorken:17/17&r=sog |