|
on Sociology of Economics |
| By: | Zakaria Babutsidze (Observatoire français des conjonctures économiques) |
| Abstract: | I argue that the impact of piracy engines for scholarly content on science depends on the nature of the research. Social sciences are more likely to reap benefits from such engines without inflicting much damage on journal publishers’ revenues. To validate the claim, I examine the data from illegal downloads of economics content from Sci-Hub over a five-month period. I conclude that: (a) the extent of piracy in economics is not pervasive; (b) downloads mostly occur in under-developed countries; (c) users pirate even content that is freely available online. As a result, publishers are n |
| Keywords: | Economics; Scientific researcher; Open access publishing; Online Privacy |
| Date: | 2018–09 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/3l64jkdu7v89h84ls9062ji03i&r=all |
| By: | Buckle, Robert A.; Creedy, John |
| Abstract: | This paper examines how the research quality of academic disciplines within New Zealand universities has evolved since the first Performance-based Research Fund (PBRF) assessment in 2003. The analysis uses a database consisting of an anonymous ‘quality category’ (QC) for each person assessed in the 2003 and 2012 PBRF assessment rounds. Individual researchers are assigned to academic discipline groups and the paper measures the distribution of researchers across disciplines and the discipline composition of universities. There has been little change in the distribution and their concentration within and across universities. However, exceptions are increases in the shares of medicine and agriculture, and a reduction in the share of education. Research Average Quality Scores are derived for discipline groups. All groups substantially increased their scores. Transition matrices show that there are significant differences in the dynamics of the various disciplines during the PBRF process. The paper shows that changes in the discipline composition of universities explains little of the proportional improvement of research quality among New Zealand universities. |
| Keywords: | Academic disciplines, Education policy, New Zealand universities, Performance-based Research Fund, Productivity, Research, Transitions, |
| Date: | 2019 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:vuw:vuwcpf:8024&r=all |
| By: | Checchi, Daniele; Ciolfi, Alberto; De Fraja, Gianni; Mazzotta, Irene; Verzillo, Stefano |
| Abstract: | This paper determines the ranking of the publications units of assessment which were submitted to the UK research evaluation carried out in 2014, the REF, which would have been obtained if their submission had been evaluated with the bibliometric algorithm used by the Italian evaluation agency, ANVUR, for its evaluation of the research of Italian universities. We find very high correlation between the two methods, especially in regard to the funding allocation, with a headline figure of 0.9997 for the funding attributed to the institutions. |
| Keywords: | Assessment of academic research; Bibliometry; incentives; Publications; University funding; University ranking |
| JEL: | I23 I28 |
| Date: | 2019–02 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:13521&r=all |
| By: | Baumann, Alexendra; Wohlrabe, Klaus |
| Abstract: | In dem vorliegenden Artikel werden die Working Paper und Policy Paper Reihen wirtschaftswissenschaftlicher Institute aus dem deutschsprachigen Raum unter bibliometrischen Gesichtspunkten analysiert. Dazu wurden entsprechende Indikatoren, wie z.B. Impaktfaktoren, von der Webseite RePEc zusammengetragen und auf deren Basis verschiedene Rankings berechnet. Auf Basis eines aggregierten Rankings zeigt sich, dass das CESifo Forum bei den Policy Paper Reihen den ersten Platz belegt. Bei den Working Paper Reihen ist es die Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin. Für jede berücksichtige Reihe werden die fünf meistzitierten Artikel dokumentiert. |
| Keywords: | Wirtschaftsforschungsinstitute, Working Paper, Policy Reports, RePEc, Bibliometrie, Ranking |
| JEL: | A11 A14 |
| Date: | 2019–02–18 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:92240&r=all |
| By: | Lutter, Mark; Schröder, Martin |
| Abstract: | Based on data that tracks CV and publication records as well as survey information from sociologists in German academia, we examine the effects of parenthood on the publication output of male and female academics. Results indicate that having children leads to a significant decline in the number of publications by women, while not affecting the number of publications by men. We also find that the gendered effect of children on productivity hardly mitigates differences in publication output between men and women, as women still publish about 20 percent less than men after controlling for the adverse effects of children on productivity. We further find that the gendered effect of childbearing depends partly on prior levels of women's academic achievements, which suggests mechanisms of performance-driven self-selection. Lower-performing women tend to suffer a stronger motherhood penalty, while the publication output of more successful women (who have been granted academic awards) is not reduced through childbirth. The results indicate that women are better at managing the 'double burden' of parenthood and career if external, award-giving committees have bestowed prestige upon them and indicated their potential for a scientific career. Overall, these findings contribute to a better understanding of how to reduce the adverse effect of children on female publication output. |
| Keywords: | academic career,academic publications,children,gender gap,motherhood penalty,Benachteiligung von Müttern,Geschlecht,Kinder,wissenschaftliche Karrieren,wissenschaftliche Publikationen |
| Date: | 2019 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:mpifgd:192&r=all |