nep-sog New Economics Papers
on Sociology of Economics
Issue of 2023‒07‒24
seven papers chosen by
Jonas Holmström
Axventure AB

  1. Fifty Shades of QE: Robust Evidence By Brian Fabo; Martina Jancokova; Elisabeth Kempf; Lubos Pastor
  2. Gender and Career Progression in Academia: European Evidence By Morettini, Lucio; Tani, Massimiliano
  3. How Does Data Access Shape Science? Evidence from the Impact of U.S. Census’s Research Data Centers on Economics Research By Abhishek Nagaraj; Matteo Tranchero
  4. Resting on Their Laureates? Research Productivity Among Winners of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine By Jay Bhattacharya; Paul Bollyky; Jeremy D. Goldhaber-Fiebert; Geir H. Holom; Mikko Packalen; David M. Studdert
  5. Against predatory publishing: the IAP report results By Minh Ha-Duong
  6. Women's Colleges and Economics Major Choice: Evidence from Wellesley College Applicants By Kristin F. Butcher; Patrick McEwan; Akila Weerapana
  7. Ph.D. Publication Productivity: The Role of Gender and Race in Supervision in South Africa By Giulia Rossello; Robin Cowan; Jacques Mairesse

  1. By: Brian Fabo (National Bank of Slovakia); Martina Jancokova (European Central Bank); Elisabeth Kempf (Booth School of Business, University of Chicago); Lubos Pastor
    Abstract: Fabo, Jancokova, Kempf, and Pastor (2021) show that papers written by central bank researchers find quantitative easing (QE) to be more effective than papers written by academics. Weale and Wieladek (2022) show that a subset of these results lose statistical significance when OLS regressions are replaced by regressions that downweight outliers. We examine those outliers and find no reason to downweight them. Most of them represent estimates from influential central bank papers published in respectable academic journals. For example, among the five papers finding the largest peak effect of QE on output, all five are published in high-quality journals (Journal of Monetary Economics, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, and Applied Economics Letters), and their average number of citations is well over 200. Moreover, we show that these papers have supported policy communication by the world’s leading central banks and shaped the public perception of the effectiveness of QE. New evidence based on quantile regressions further supports the results in Fabo et al. (2021).
    JEL: A11 E52 E58 G28
    Date: 2023–06
  2. By: Morettini, Lucio (National Research Council, Italy); Tani, Massimiliano (University of New South Wales)
    Abstract: We study career trajectories of university researchers in Europe, with a particular emphasis on the speed of career progression by gender. Using the panel data collected by the MORE project (Mobility Survey of the Higher Education Sector) - a longitudinal database that gathers survey responses from over 10, 000 university researchers across Europe - we find that women have a lower probability of promotion, but conditional on a career advance, their career development proceeds at a faster pace than that of comparable male researchers. Faster progression among women is positively influenced by the share of female researchers in the academic environment. Higher salaries in sectors outside academia appear to reinforce the positive selection of women preferring to stay in academia.
    Keywords: academic careers, career progression, promotion
    JEL: J20 J24 J62
    Date: 2023–06
  3. By: Abhishek Nagaraj; Matteo Tranchero
    Abstract: This study examines the impact of access to confidential administrative data on the rate, direction, and policy relevance of economics research. To study this question, we exploit the progressive geographic expansion of the U.S. Census Bureau’s Federal Statistical Research Data Centers (FSRDCs). FSRDCs boost data diffusion, help empirical researchers publish more articles in top outlets, and increase citation-weighted publications. Besides direct data usage, spillovers to non-adopters also drive this effect. Further, citations to exposed researchers in policy documents increase significantly. Our findings underscore the importance of data access for scientific progress and evidence-based policy formulation.
    JEL: C81 H00 L86 O33 O38
    Date: 2023–06
  4. By: Jay Bhattacharya; Paul Bollyky; Jeremy D. Goldhaber-Fiebert; Geir H. Holom; Mikko Packalen; David M. Studdert
    Abstract: The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine is the most prestigious and coveted award in medical research. Anecdotal evidence and related research suggest that receiving it may adversely affect research productivity. We compared the post-Nobel research output of laureates (prize years: 1950-2010) with their pre-Nobel output and with the output of a matched control group consisting of winners of the Lasker Award, another highly prestigious medical research prize. Pre-Nobel, laureates’ publications were more voluminous, highly cited, and novel than those of (future) Lasker winners. Post-Nobel, laureates’ productivity decreased sharply, eventually falling below that of Lasker winners on all three measures. These declines may reflect diversionary effects of the Prize, changed incentives, or intrinsically different career arcs for medical researchers who win the Nobel Prize.
    JEL: I1 I23 O3
    Date: 2023–06
  5. By: Minh Ha-Duong (CIRED - Centre International de Recherche sur l'Environnement et le Développement - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - AgroParisTech - ENPC - École des Ponts ParisTech - Université Paris-Saclay - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)
    Abstract: The problem of predatory academic publishing is that many journals and conferences pretend to have scientific standards but, in reality, have only financial motivations. They will publish anything as long as the author pays for it. Too many researchers, under the pressure of "publish or perish, "
    Date: 2023–05–19
  6. By: Kristin F. Butcher; Patrick McEwan; Akila Weerapana
    Abstract: Many observers argue that diversity in Economics and STEM fields is critical, not simply because of egalitarian goals, but because who is in a field may shape what is studied by it. If increasing the rate of majoring in mathematically-intensive fields among women is a worthy goal, then understanding whether women’s colleges causally affect that choice is important. Among all admitted applicants to Wellesley College, enrollees are 7.2 percentage points (94%) more likely to receive an Economics degree than non-enrollees (a plausible lower bound given negative selection into enrollment on math skills and major preferences). Overall, 3.2 percentage points—or 44% of the difference between enrollees and non-enrollees—is explained by college exposure to female instructors and students, consistent with a wider role for women’s colleges in increasing female participation in Economics.
    Date: 2023–04
  7. By: Giulia Rossello; Robin Cowan; Jacques Mairesse
    Abstract: We study whether student-advisor gender and race composition matters for publication productivity of Ph.D. students in South Africa. We consider all Ph.D. students in STEM graduating between 2000 and 2014, after the recent systematic introduction of doctoral programs in this country. We investigate the joint effects of gender and race for the whole sample and looking separately at the sub-samples of (1) white-white; (2) black-black; and (3) black-white student-advisor couples. We find significant productivity differences between male and female students. These disparities are more pronounced for female students working with male advisors when looking at the joint effects of gender and race for the white-white and black-black student-advisor pairs. We also explore whether publication productivity differences change significantly for students with a high, medium, or low “productivity-profile”. We find that female productivity gaps are U-shaped over the range of productivity. Female students working with male advisors have more persistent productivity gaps over the productivity distribution, while female students with a high (or low) “productivity-profile” studying with female advisors are as productive as male students with similar “productivity-profile” studying with male advisors.
    JEL: A14 I23 I24 J15 J16 O32
    Date: 2023–06

This nep-sog issue is ©2023 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.