nep-sog New Economics Papers
on Sociology of Economics
Issue of 2018‒12‒03
three papers chosen by
Jonas Holmström
Axventure AB

  1. Should citations be weighted to assess the influence of an academic article? By Abdelghani Maddi; Damien Besancenot
  2. Ninety years of publications in Economic History: evidence from the top five field journals (1927-2017) By Martina Cioni; Govanni Federico; Michelangelo Vasta
  3. Knowledge and Perceptions of Open Science among Researchers—A Case Study for Colombia By Alexander Cotte Poveda; Clara Pardo Martinez

  1. By: Abdelghani Maddi (Centre d'Economie de l'Université de Paris Nord (CEPN)); Damien Besancenot (LIRAES and Université Paris 5, Sorbonne Paris Cité)
    Abstract: Citations are by nature heterogeneous. A citation worth may dramatically vary according to the influence of the citing article or to the journal’s reputation from which it is issued. Therefore, while assessing the influence of an academic article, how should we weight citations to take into account their real influence? In order to answer this question, this article suggests various methods of weighting citations in the building of articles quality indexes. These indexes are then used to measure the influence of the articles published in the top five economic journals over the 2000-2010 period and analyses the sensibility of these indexes to the choice of the weighting schemes. Our main result is that whatever the weighting scheme, information carried by the different indexes is not significantly different. From Occam’s razor principle, the number of citations provides an efficient and sufficient tool to measure research quality.
    Keywords: Citations, Articles’ ranking, weighting functions, Pagerank, Eigenfactor.
    JEL: A14 C18 C43
    Date: 2018–11
  2. By: Martina Cioni; Govanni Federico; Michelangelo Vasta
    Abstract: The growing appeal of the long run perspective among economists and the fiftieth anniversary of the of the publication of the Conrad and Meyer article (1958), which signed the Cliometric Revolution, have attracted a lot of interest on the origin and the development of Economic history. This paper explores the evolution of the field with a new articulated database of all the 6,516 articles published in five journals (Economic History Review, Journal of Economic History, Explorations in Economic History, European Review of Economic History and Cliometrica) from their establishment to 2017. We show that these journals are the most important in the field, with a wide influence also outside it. Our main results are that the Cliometric Revolution took quite a long time to fully display its effects, which became evident only in the 1990s, when personal computer and software packages became available. Finally, as for the last two decades, we find that the process of integration of economic history into economics is, so far, slower than previously suggested and limited to US. On the other hand, the most striking and neglected change is the overall success of Continental European scholars within the field. Are these changes the harbinger of a new divergence between the two shores of the Atlantic with the rise of a new paradigm based on the “Historical economics” approach? It is too early to tell.
    JEL: N01
    Date: 2018–11
  3. By: Alexander Cotte Poveda; Clara Pardo Martinez
    Abstract: Open science can provide researchers diverse opportunities to collaborate, disseminate their research results, generate important impacts in the scientific community, and engage in effective and efficient science for the benefit of society. This study seeks to analyse and evaluate researchers’ knowledge of open science in Colombia using a survey to determine adequate instruments with which to improve research in the framework of open science. The aim of the study is to determine researchers’ current awareness of open science by considering demographic characteristics to analyse their attitudes, values, and information habits as well as the levels of institutionalism and social appropriation of open science. A representative sample of Colombian researchers was selected from the National Research System. An anonymous online survey consisting of 34 questions was sent to all professors and researchers at Colombian universities and research institutes. Sampling was random and stratified, which allowed for a representative sample of different categories of researchers, and principal component analysis (PCA) was used for the sample design. A total of 1042 responses were received, with a 95% confidence level and a margin of error of 3%. The majority of respondents knew about open science, especially in relation to open science tools (software, repositories, and networks) and open data. Researchers consider open science to be positively impacted by factors such as the rise of digital technologies, the search for new forms of collaboration, the greater availability of open data and information, and public demand for better and more effective science. In contrast, a lack of resources to develop research activities within the open science approach and the limited integration between traditional and open science are identified as the most important barriers to its use in research. These results are important for building adequate open science policy in Colombia.
    JEL: O30 O32 O33
    Date: 2018–11–21

This nep-sog issue is ©2018 by Jonas Holmström. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.