nep-sog New Economics Papers
on Sociology of Economics
Issue of 2024‒06‒24
six papers chosen by
Jonas Holmström, Axventure AB


  1. The Women in Economics Index - Monitoring Women Economists' Representation in Leadership Positions By Jana Schuetz; Virginia Sondergeld; Insa Weilage
  2. Half Empty and Half Full? Women in Economics and the Rise in Gender-Related Research By Francisca M. Antman; Kirk B. Doran; Xuechao Qian; Bruce A. Weinberg
  3. Demographic Diversity and Economic Research: Fields of Specialization and Research on Race, Ethnicity, and Inequality By Antman, Francisca M.; Doran, Kirk; Qian, Xuechao; Weinberg, Bruce A.
  4. Paper Tiger? Chinese Science and Home Bias in Citations By Shumin Qiu; Claudia Steinwender; Pierre Azoulay
  5. The value of research activities “other than” publishing articles: reflections on an experimental workshop series By Chahed, Yasmine; Charnock, Robert; Du Rietz, Sabina; Joseph Lennon, Niels; Palermo, Tommaso; Parisi, Cristiana; Pflueger, Dane; Sundström, Andreas; Toh, Dorothy; Yu, Lichen
  6. How nobel-prize breakthroughs in economics emerge and the field's influential empirical methods By Krauss, Alexander

  1. By: Jana Schuetz; Virginia Sondergeld; Insa Weilage
    Abstract: We contribute to the research on gender representation in economics by documenting the share of women among economists in a variety of leadership positions in the academic, but also in the private and public sectors, both globally and by region. For the years 2019 to 2023, we find women economists’ representation overall to be low in all sectors and no clear-cut trends over time. In academia, we find women’s representation to be highest in Africa and Oceania, an observation that previous studies could not show so far as they analysed global top departments and thus mechanically focused on North America and Europe. Also for the public sector, we highlight significant regional discrepancies.
    Keywords: Female representation, gender equality, women in economics
    JEL: A11 J16
    Date: 2024
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:diw:diwwpp:dp2076&r=
  2. By: Francisca M. Antman; Kirk B. Doran; Xuechao Qian; Bruce A. Weinberg
    Abstract: Using the EconLit dissertation database and large-scale algorithmic methods that identify author demographics from names, we investigate the connection between the gender of economics dissertators and dissertation topics. Despite stagnation in the share of women among economics Ph.D.s in recent years, there has been a remarkable rise in gender-related dissertations in economics over time and in many sub-fields. Women economists are significantly more likely to write gender-related dissertations and bring gender-related topics into a wide range of fields within economics. Men in economics have also substantially increased their interest in gender-related topics.
    JEL: A23 I23 J16 O30
    Date: 2024–05
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:32442&r=
  3. By: Antman, Francisca M. (University of Colorado, Boulder); Doran, Kirk (University of Notre Dame); Qian, Xuechao (Stanford University); Weinberg, Bruce A. (Ohio State University)
    Abstract: Using dissertation research topics found in the EconLit database and large-scale algorithmic methods that identify author demographics based on names, we explore the link between race and ethnicity and fields of economic research. We find that underrepresented racial and ethnic minority (URM) researchers are more likely to write dissertations in some unexpected sub-fields of economics, but limited evidence that they are more likely to write dissertations on racial topics once we include basic controls. These descriptive results may be due to limitations in the data, intrinsic motivations, or external constraints.
    Keywords: economic research, race and ethnicity, dissertation
    JEL: I23 J15 O30
    Date: 2024–05
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:iza:izadps:dp16979&r=
  4. By: Shumin Qiu; Claudia Steinwender; Pierre Azoulay
    Abstract: We investigate the phenomenon of home bias in scientific citations, where researchers disproportionately cite work from their own country. We develop a benchmark for expected citations based on the relative size of countries, defining home bias as deviations from this norm. Our findings reveal that China exhibits the largest home bias across all major countries and in nearly all scientific fields studied. This stands in contrast to the pattern of home bias for China’s trade in goods and services, where China does not stand out from most industrialized countries. After adjusting citation counts for home bias, we demonstrate that China’s apparent rise in citation rankings is overstated. Our adjusted ranking places China fourth globally, behind the US, the UK, and Germany, tempering the perception of China’s scientific dominance.
    JEL: F14 I23 O32
    Date: 2024–05
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:32468&r=
  5. By: Chahed, Yasmine; Charnock, Robert; Du Rietz, Sabina; Joseph Lennon, Niels; Palermo, Tommaso; Parisi, Cristiana; Pflueger, Dane; Sundström, Andreas; Toh, Dorothy; Yu, Lichen
    Abstract: Purpose The purpose of this essay is to explore the opportunities and challenges that Early-Career Researchers (ECRs) face when they seek to contribute to academic knowledge production through research activities “other than” those directly focused on making progress with their own, to-be-published, research papers in a context associated with the “publish or perish” mentality. Design/methodology/approach Drawing broadly on the notion of technologies of humility (Jasanoff, 2003), this reflective essay develops upon the experiences of the authors in organizing and participating in a series of nine workshops undertaken between June 2013 and April 2021 as well as the arduous process of writing this paper itself. Retrospective accounts, workshop materials, email exchanges, and surveys of workshop participants provide the key data sources for the analysis presented in the paper. Findings The paper shows how the organization of the workshops is intertwined with the building of a small community of ECRs and exploration of how to address the perceived limitations of a “gap-spotting” approach to developing research ideas and questions. The analysis foregrounds how the workshops provide a seemingly valuable research experience that is not without contradictions. Workshop participation reveals tensions between engagement in activities “other than” working on papers for publication and institutionalized pressures to produce publication outputs, between the (weak) perceived status of ECRs in the field and the aspiration to make a scholarly contribution, and between the desire to develop a personally satisfying intellectual journey and the pressure to respond to requirements that allow access to a wider community of scholars. Originality/value Our analysis contributes to debates about the ways in which seemingly valuable outputs are produced in academia despite a pervasive “publish or perish” mentality. The analysis also shows how reflexive writing can help to better understand the opportunities and challenges of pursuing activities that might be considered “unproductive” because they are not directly related to to-be-published papers.
    Keywords: interpretive accounting research; technologies of humility; early-career researchers; problematization; gap-spotting; reflexivity
    JEL: M40
    Date: 2024–03–22
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ehl:lserod:121656&r=
  6. By: Krauss, Alexander
    Abstract: What drives groundbreaking research in economics? Nobel-prize-winning work has had an important impact on public policies, but we still do not understand well what drives such breakthroughs. We collect data on all nobel-prize discoveries in economics to address this question. We find that major advances in the field of economics are brought about by methodological innovation: by developing new and improved research methods. We find that developing for example econometrics in 1933, randomised controlled trials in 1948 and new game theory methods in 1950 were essential to opening the new fields of corporate finance, experimental economics and information economics, respectively. We identify the development of new methods as the main mechanism driving new discoveries and research fields. Fostering this general mechanism (generating novel methods) holds the potential to greatly increase the rate at which we make new breakthroughs and fields. We also show that many of the main methods of economics – such as randomised controlled trials, natural experiments, regression discontinuity, instrumental variables and other statistical methods – had been developed and used in other fields like public health, before economists adopted them. This shift towards more powerful empirical methods in the field has important implications on developing new and better methods and adopting them from related fields to make new advances more rapidly.
    Keywords: economic breakthroughs; economic discoveries; economic methods; economics of science; Nobel prize; scientific discovery; scientific innovation
    JEL: J1
    Date: 2024–05–01
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ehl:lserod:123039&r=

This nep-sog issue is ©2024 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 https://nep.repec.org. For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <director@nep.repec.org>. 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.