|
on Sociology of Economics |
| By: | Clément Bosquet (CES - Centre d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique); Pierre-Philippe Combes (ECON - Département d'économie (Sciences Po) - Sciences Po - Sciences Po - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, CEPR - Center for Economic Policy Research - CEPR); Emeric Henry (ECON - Département d'économie (Sciences Po) - Sciences Po - Sciences Po - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, CEPR - Center for Economic Policy Research - CEPR); Thierry Mayer (ECON - Département d'économie (Sciences Po) - Sciences Po - Sciences Po - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, CEPR - Center for Economic Policy Research - CEPR) |
| Abstract: | Using an instrument based on a national contest in France determining researchers' location, we find evidence of peer effects in academia, when focusing on precise groups of senders (producing the spillovers) and receivers (benefiting from the spillovers), defined based on field of specialisation, gender and age. These peer effects are present even outside formal co-authorship relationships. Furthermore, the match between the characteristics of senders and receivers plays a critical role. In particular, men benefit a lot from peer effects provided by other men, while all other types of gender combinations produce spillovers twice as small. Part of the peer effects results from researchers switching research fields. |
| Keywords: | Economics of science, Peer effects, Research productivity, Gender publication gap |
| Date: | 2022–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:spmain:hal-03874070&r=sog |
| By: | Mindsponge, AISDL |
| Abstract: | Pursuing the academic path is challenging, especially when the “publish or perish” culture has been embedded in most scholarly communities. Publication in a peer-reviewed journal is recognized as the representation of competency by many academic institutions and universities. Researchers often regard it as a way to get recognition, funding, and progress in the field. However, empirical research has shown that although publications in peer-reviewed journals have higher quality than preprints, the difference is small. Meanwhile, the subjective ratings over the clarity of titles, abstracts, and reporting information result in significant differences favoring peer-reviewed articles. This contrast leads to several questions: How have the scholarly communities generally accepted an unspoken rule that a publication in a peer-reviewed journal is of equal quality? Is it good or bad for scientific progress? What are the roles of the Open Access movement in the modern publishing system? It will require a long journey to answer all these questions. In serving the SM3D Portal community, a series of writing will be dedicated to answering these questions, discussing them with cost-benefit and ethical aspects, and offering more detailed reasoning under the lens of information processing. One of the first steps is to understand the origins of modern scientific publishing, which is also the aim of the current essay. |
| Date: | 2022–11–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:osfxxx:4a57e&r=sog |